Bug#387230: fglrx-kernel-src: the module build is sucessfull, but it cant be loaded by kernel
Hi I think I have the same problem, but since I'm running etch and etch doesn't have gcc-4.0, I'm out of luck, am I not? Rebuilding Kernel and Driver with gcc-3.4 wouldn't help, would it? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#404471: Is wacom-kernel-source really needed?
Hi Oh, I didn't know that. When I was installing Debian quite some time ago I needed that package. I'll try and see today whether it works without. Thanks for pointing this out. Maybe you could add something a remark to the package description? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#404471: wacom-kernel-source: cannot build/install using m-a or adept
Package: wacom-kernel-source Version: 0.7.4.1-5 Severity: serious Justification: no longer builds from source Hi I'd like to get wacom-kernel-source building. When I do a m-a auto-build wacom I see the ncurses dialog Build of the package wacom-kernel-source failed! How do you wish to proceed?, but VIEW doesn't show a build log, so I exit. Then I try installing the package wacom-kernel-source in adept: /var/lib/dpkg/info/wacom-kernel-source.postinst: line 49: [: too many arguments Warning: kernel headers don't match running Linux version. Building wacom modules for Linux _CODE 13262 (this may take a few minutes)... and it exits the installation. I have linux-image-2.6-686 and linux-image-2.6.18-3-686 installed, as well as linux-headers-2.6-686, linux-headers-2.6.18-3 and linux-headers-2.6.18-3-686. That should be okay, shouldn't it? -- System Information: Debian Release: 4.0 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-3-686 Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Versions of packages wacom-kernel-source depends on: ii build-essential 11.3 informational list of build-essent ii debconf [debconf-2.0] 1.5.8 Debian configuration management sy ii debhelper 5.0.42 helper programs for debian/rules ii libx11-dev2:1.0.3-4 X11 client-side library (developme wacom-kernel-source recommends no packages. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#311843: severity?
Hi I just fell into the very same trap. I suggest you do the following: a) make crystal clear in the packages description (as shown by aptitude) that this has nothing to do with secure-apt. This tool inspects and verifies package signatures based on predetermined policies. sounds just like use this if you want packages verified. b) ensure that installing the package doesn't break the whole package system If this is a problem of dpkg, fine, but please do something about it. It's really confusing. Especially if debsig-verify is just one of a lot of packages to be installed, the installation fails from some point on and you get many many error messages. At first I wasn't even sure which package needed to be uninstalled. debsig-verify? dpkg-sig? (I think there was another one that seemed to have something to do with package signing) Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#397901: installation-report: installation report
David Härdeman wrote: On Fri, November 10, 2006 12:02, Thomas Hühn said: - I was surprised to see crypto support in the partitioning phase. First I thought Debian now supports encrypted partitions for the system in the installer (encrypt partitions except /boot), but obviously I was wrong. :-/ That would be a wishlist item for me, though. I'm not sure I understand this wishlist item actually. When you get to the partitioning step of the installer, on the first screen, you should have an option named Automatically install using lvm and crypto or something like that (can't check the exact naming right now). If you choose that option, it will automatically partition the harddrive using a regular boot partition and encrypted LVM devices for the rest. Is this not what you requested? Yes, it seems so. Does Automatically mean that I can't influence the size of the partitions? That's probably why I chose the manual option. And after that I could define partitions as crypto volume or something like that, but I couldn't give it a file system and mount point. Greetings Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#379787: minor
Package: exim4-base Version: 4.50-8sarge2 Severity: minor /usr/share/doc/exim4-base/README.Debian.gz says Benefits of the unsplit configuration approach: * It is more fragile. Being more fragile is a strange kind of benefit. :-) Suggestion: Either Downsides to... or It is less fragile... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
