Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-09-01 at 10:54, John Keller wrote:
> > Bellegarde Cedric wrote:
> > > When i run an urpmi --auto-select, urpmi don't tell me anyting if
there
> > > is noting to upgrade.
> > >
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] gnumdk]# urpmi --auto-select
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] gnumdk]#
Kim Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> # urpmi.update -a
> unable to access hdlist file of "main1", medium ignored
> unable to access hdlist file of "main3", medium ignored
> unable to access hdlist file of "contrib1", medium ignored
> unable to access hdlist file of "contrib3", medium ignored
Bellegarde Cedric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> When i run an urpmi --auto-select, urpmi don't tell me anyting if there
> is noting to upgrade.
fixed in urpmi-4.4-29mdk.
François.
On Mon, 2003-09-01 at 11:54, John Keller wrote:
> Bellegarde Cedric wrote:
> > When i run an urpmi --auto-select, urpmi don't tell me anyting if there
> > is noting to upgrade.
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] gnumdk]# urpmi --auto-select
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] gnumdk]#
Really it should give a message of
On Mon, 2003-09-01 at 10:54, John Keller wrote:
> Bellegarde Cedric wrote:
> > When i run an urpmi --auto-select, urpmi don't tell me anyting if there
> > is noting to upgrade.
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] gnumdk]# urpmi --auto-select
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] gnumdk]#
>
> You need to run urpmi.update -a
Bellegarde Cedric wrote:
> When i run an urpmi --auto-select, urpmi don't tell me anyting if there
> is noting to upgrade.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] gnumdk]# urpmi --auto-select
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] gnumdk]#
You need to run urpmi.update -a first. However, it may have simply been that
updates were simpl
When i run an urpmi --auto-select, urpmi don't tell me anyting if there
is noting to upgrade.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] gnumdk]# urpmi --auto-select
[EMAIL PROTECTED] gnumdk]#
Kim Schulz wrote:
> hi
Hi.
> I have a problem with the latest couple of version(packages) of urpmi.
> Whenever I add a new source (main and contrib) via urpmi.setup, then it
> works for one done download (or actually until I do urpmi.update -a the
> next time). After that it sets ignore on some o
hi
I have a problem with the latest couple of version(packages) of urpmi.
Whenever I add a new source (main and contrib) via urpmi.setup, then it
works for one done download (or actually until I do urpmi.update -a the
next time). After that it sets ignore on some of the sources - which
ones seems l
Hi
When I used urpmi.update --wget -a && urpmi --wget --auto-select --auto
I got bugreport:
...
write config file [/etc/urpmi/urpmi.cfg]
ftp://ftp.uninett.no/linux/Mandrake/Mandrake-devel/cooker/i586/Mandrake/RPMS2/ldconfig-2.3.2-13mdk.i586.rpm
ftp://ftp.uninett.no/linux/Mandrake/Mandr
"Brian Tyndall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Well after the problem occurred, check rpm -q --whatprovides
> > libexpat.so.0 just to see ?
>
> I can't really do that... slbd is running, installing packages into the
> chroot, rebuilding the src.rpm and then de-installin the installed
> packages.
Fabien ILLIDE wrote:
François Pons wrote:
...
Try again updating and check it still works, do you have used symlink in
/var/cache/urpmi or /var/lib/urpmi to perform some tasks ?
Well, I've update many many times, with always same result :
For update_source for example : the all file is download
ed this to it (and a "\" behind the --root command) and it went
fine:
--split-length 0
> In fact, did you used --test because this option cannot run with splited
> transactions ? But it seems no according to your logs, unless you have
> used them before and silently ?
Nope.
>> A
François Pons wrote:
Fabien ILLIDE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
In case of :
[EMAIL PROTECTED] fabien]# ll /var/cache/urpmi/partial/
-rw-r--r--1 root root 356352 aoû 22 14:31 hdlist.cz
-rw-r--r--1 root root 98 aoû 20 11:01 MD5SUM
For sure an hdlist is not 356352 by
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
Fabien ILLIDE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
Is it these files which are writen when urpmi.update ?
"strace" would help much :).
use "strace -eopen urpmi blabla.."
Thanks a lot for the tip ! :o)
--
Les brevets de logiciels : une menace extrêmement grave pèse sur
l
/resent, sorry if get twice/
François Pons wrote:
Fabien ILLIDE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
In case of :
[EMAIL PROTECTED] fabien]# ll /var/cache/urpmi/partial/
-rw-r--r--1 root root 356352 aoû 22 14:31 hdlist.cz
-rw-r--r--1 root root 98 aoû 20 11:01 MD5SUM
For s
Fabien ILLIDE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> I've think of it, but even if my disk is overloaded, it's not full :
Ok.
[...]
> Is it these files which are writen when urpmi.update ?
"strace" would help much :).
use "strace -eopen urpmi blabla.."
--
Guillaume Cottenceau - http://peop
Guillaume Cottenceau a écrit :
Fabien ILLIDE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi,
I know about the mirror problem, but it seems that urpmi have a problem too.
When I do urpmi.update -a, it download good the lists, but :
[EMAIL PROTECTED] urpmi]# urpmi.update -a
récupération du hdlist source (ou synt
Fabien ILLIDE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In case of :
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] fabien]# ll /var/cache/urpmi/partial/
> -rw-r--r--1 root root 356352 aoû 22 14:31 hdlist.cz
> -rw-r--r--1 root root 98 aoû 20 11:01 MD5SUM
For sure an hdlist is not 356352 bytes longs, you
Fabien ILLIDE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> I know about the mirror problem, but it seems that urpmi have a problem too.
>
> When I do urpmi.update -a, it download good the lists, but :
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] urpmi]# urpmi.update -a
> récupération du hdlist source (ou synthèse) de « update_
Hi,
I know about the mirror problem, but it seems that urpmi have a problem too.
When I do urpmi.update -a, it download good the lists, but :
[EMAIL PROTECTED] urpmi]# urpmi.update -a
récupération du hdlist source (ou synthèse) de « update_source »...
ftp://ftp.lip6.fr/pub/linux/distributions/man
Ainsi parlait Ken Thompson :
> More than 80% of the tim ewhen I try to install something I get this error
> message. Even updated my media sources.
>
> -- Installation failed:
> liblirc_client.so.0 is needed by xawtv-3.88-2mdk
> Installation failed, some files are missing:
>
> ftp://csociet
On Thu Aug 07 18:44 -0700, Quel Qun wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 13:11, Buchan Milne wrote:
> <...>
> > If you have a mildly recent urpmi, it should not be necessary, since:
> > # urpmi --auto-select --auto --keep
> > should work (BTW, I run this in cron)
> >
> Yep, urpmi is getting even better
On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 08:51:09 -0400
Frank Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kim Schulz wrote:
> I had similar problems on another thread, and the suggestion was to
> use
> --allow-nodeps --allow-force
> I had to respond to some scary prompts, but "urpmi urpmi" eventually
> installed the lat
On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 13:11, Buchan Milne wrote:
<...>
> If you have a mildly recent urpmi, it should not be necessary, since:
> # urpmi --auto-select --auto --keep
> should work (BTW, I run this in cron)
>
Yep, urpmi is getting even better than manual installs. Very good work.
One question, tho
More than 80% of the tim ewhen I try to install something I get this error
message. Even updated my media sources.
-- Installation failed:
liblirc_client.so.0 is needed by xawtv-3.88-2mdk
Installation failed, some files are missing:
ftp://csociety-ftp.ecn.purdue.edu/pub/Mandrake-deve
On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 16:53:29 -0400
Frank Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kim Schulz wrote:
>
> I'm not sure what you're upgrading from. I did it from base 9.1, and
> I'd say that it involved at least 300 packages. And, like I said, you
>
> get some scary prompts. I don't recall the compon
Frank Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Kim Schulz wrote:
>
> >just tried this and it wanted to install around 300 rpm's but ended up
> >with this:
> >Installation failed:
> > arts = 3001:1.1.3-1mdk is needed by libarts-devel-1.1.3-1mdk
> > arts = 3001:1.1.3-1mdk is needed by
The --keep option for urpmi is very welcome, when packages cannot be
updated because some of them had to be removed, at least the updating
process does not stop.
What about making the --keep option the default behaviour of urpmi, and
replace it by its counterpart : a --not-keep or --remove-if-n
Kim Schulz wrote:
[snip]
Use --keep
not an option for my version of urpmi. and when I try to upgrade urpmi,
then I get alot of other deps (especially alot of kde and mozilla
stuff).
I had similar problems on another thread, and the suggestion was to use
--allow-nodeps --allow-force
Kim Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [snip]
> > Use --keep
>
> not an option for my version of urpmi. and when I try to upgrade urpmi,
> then I get alot of other deps (especially alot of kde and mozilla
> stuff).
I may do an unsupported update of urpmi for 9.1, but not yet.
François.
Kim Schulz wrote:
just tried this and it wanted to install around 300 rpm's but ended up
with this:
Installation failed:
arts = 3001:1.1.3-1mdk is needed by libarts-devel-1.1.3-1mdk
arts = 3001:1.1.3-1mdk is needed by libarts-1.1.3-1mdk
libxml2.so is needed by (inst
Kim Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Im trying to get my cooker to update (it's been almost a month due to
> missing internet con.), but I get this when I do an auto select:
>
> # urpmi --auto-select
> One of the following packages is needed:
> 1- ksymoops-2.4.8-2mdk.i586
> 2- kernel-utils
On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 14:21:32 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (François Pons) wrote:
> Kim Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > [snip]
> > > Use --keep
> >
> > not an option for my version of urpmi. and when I try to upgrade
> > urpmi, then I get alot of other deps (especially alot of kde and
> > mozi
[snip]
> Use --keep
not an option for my version of urpmi. and when I try to upgrade urpmi,
then I get alot of other deps (especially alot of kde and mozilla
stuff).
--
Navn : Kim Schulz | Let the people think they govern and they
Email : kim @ schulz.dk | will be governed. -- William Pe
Im trying to get my cooker to update (it's been almost a month due to
missing internet con.), but I get this when I do an auto select:
# urpmi --auto-select
One of the following packages is needed:
1- ksymoops-2.4.8-2mdk.i586
2- kernel-utils-0.1-1mdk.i586
What is your choice? (1-2) 2
Some packa
Adam Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 20:42, Dave Cotton wrote:
> > What is going on?
> >
> > urpmi --auto-select
> >
> > suddenly in the middle of everything there's this
> >
> > installing /mnt/Cooker/libfreetype6-2.1.4-5mdk.i586.rpm
> > removing libgdk-pixbuf2-
On Friday 01 August 2003 07:04 am, John van Spaandonk wrote:
> On Friday 01 August 2003 10:43, Duncan wrote:
> > On Wed 30 Jul 2003 10:56, Olivier Thauvin posted as excerpted below:
> > > Le Mercredi 30 Juillet 2003 17:42, John van Spaandonk a écrit :
> > >
> > > My reply to John is somewhere in th
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Joe Baker wrote:
> Running Urpmi dhcp-server
> Yeilded:
> ftp://10.0.0.93/pub/Mandrake9.2beta1/i586/Mandrake/RPMS2/dhcp-server-3.0-2pl2.5mdk.i586.rpm
> The following packages have bad signatures:
> /var/cache/urpmi/rpms/dhcp-server-3.0-2p12.5mdk.i586.rpm: Invalid
> signature (
Le Vendredi 1 Août 2003 23:29, Joe Baker a écrit :
> Running Urpmi dhcp-server
> Yeilded:
> ftp://10.0.0.93/pub/Mandrake9.2beta1/i586/Mandrake/RPMS2/dhcp-server-3.0-2p
>l2.5mdk.i586.rpm The following packages have bad signatures:
> /var/cache/urpmi/rpms/dhcp-server-3.0-2p12.5mdk.i586.rpm: Invalid
>
On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 20:42, Dave Cotton wrote:
> What is going on?
>
> urpmi --auto-select
>
> suddenly in the middle of everything there's this
>
> installing /mnt/Cooker/libfreetype6-2.1.4-5mdk.i586.rpm
> removing libgdk-pixbuf2-devel-0.22.0-2mdk.i586
> XFree86-static-libs-4.3-13mdk.i586 lib
Running Urpmi dhcp-server
Yeilded:
ftp://10.0.0.93/pub/Mandrake9.2beta1/i586/Mandrake/RPMS2/dhcp-server-3.0-2pl2.5mdk.i586.rpm
The following packages have bad signatures:
/var/cache/urpmi/rpms/dhcp-server-3.0-2p12.5mdk.i586.rpm: Invalid
signature (sha1 md5 (GPG) (MISSING KEY) GPG#70771ff3 NOT OK)
What is going on?
urpmi --auto-select
suddenly in the middle of everything there's this
installing /mnt/Cooker/libfreetype6-2.1.4-5mdk.i586.rpm
removing libgdk-pixbuf2-devel-0.22.0-2mdk.i586
XFree86-static-libs-4.3-13mdk.i586 libfontconfig1-devel-2.2.1-2mdk.i586
lsb-1.3-7mdk.noarch freetype2-de
On Friday 01 August 2003 18:29, Duncan wrote:
> On Fri 01 Aug 2003 06:18, John van Spaandonk posted as excerpted below:
> > Before latest upgrade (1-8, 13:00, ftp.uninett.no):
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] downloads]$ rpm -q kdebase
> > kdebase-3.1.2-30mdk
> > kdebase-3.1.3-3mdk
> >
> > After this upgr
On Fri 01 Aug 2003 06:18, John van Spaandonk posted as excerpted below:
> Before latest upgrade (1-8, 13:00, ftp.uninett.no):
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] downloads]$ rpm -q kdebase
> kdebase-3.1.2-30mdk
> kdebase-3.1.3-3mdk
>
> After this upgrade:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] downloads]$ rpm -q kdebase
> kdebas
On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 16:33:22 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (François Pons) wrote:
> urpmi urpmi perl-URPM --keep
# urpmi urpmi perl-URPM --keep
urpmi: unknown option "--keep", check usage with --help
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kim Schulz wrote:
> Im trying to upgrade my urpmi to latest version (to get rid of the curl
> error messages) but I keep getting this:
>
>
> # urpmi urpmi
> Some package requested cannot be installed:
> kdebase-3.1.3-4mdk.i586 (due to missing
> kdebase
On Friday 01 August 2003 08:33 am, François Pons wrote:
> Kim Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Im trying to upgrade my urpmi to latest version (to get rid of the curl
> > error messages) but I keep getting this:
> >
> >
> > # urpmi urpmi
> > Some package requested cannot be installed:
> > kde
Kim Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Im trying to upgrade my urpmi to latest version (to get rid of the curl
> error messages) but I keep getting this:
>
>
> # urpmi urpmi
> Some package requested cannot be installed:
> kdebase-3.1.3-4mdk.i586 (due to missing
> kdebase-kdm-config-file-3.1.3-
Im trying to upgrade my urpmi to latest version (to get rid of the curl
error messages) but I keep getting this:
# urpmi urpmi
Some package requested cannot be installed:
kdebase-3.1.3-4mdk.i586 (due to missing
kdebase-kdm-config-file-3.1.3-3mdk.i586)
kdebase-kdm-config-file-3.1.3-3mdk.i586 (due
Before latest upgrade (1-8, 13:00, ftp.uninett.no):
[EMAIL PROTECTED] downloads]$ rpm -q kdebase
kdebase-3.1.2-30mdk
kdebase-3.1.3-3mdk
After this upgrade:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] downloads]$ rpm -q kdebase
kdebase-3.1.2-30mdk
kdebase-3.1.3-3mdk
kdebase-3.1.3-4mdk
sigh.
ed this to it (and a "\" behind the --root command) and it went
fine:
--split-length 0
> In fact, did you used --test because this option cannot run with splited
> transactions ? But it seems no according to your logs, unless you have
> used them before and silently ?
Nope.
>> A
On Friday 01 August 2003 13:39, François Pons wrote:
>
> urpmi --auto-select --bug urpmibug --media cooker
>
> will work better.
>
Thanks!
John van Spaandonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> While experimenting with urpmi I tried
>
> urpmi --auto-select --bug --media cooker
>
> and I noticed that the --bug supresses my explicit media selection, so
> in my case packages from cooker, plf and contrib were installed...
urpmi --auto-sele
Le Vendredi 01 Août 2003 13:04, John van Spaandonk a écrit :
> On Friday 01 August 2003 10:43, Duncan wrote:
> > On Wed 30 Jul 2003 10:56, Olivier Thauvin posted as excerpted below:
> > > Le Mercredi 30 Juillet 2003 17:42, John van Spaandonk a écrit :
[...]
> While experimenting with urpmi I tried
On Friday 01 August 2003 10:43, Duncan wrote:
> On Wed 30 Jul 2003 10:56, Olivier Thauvin posted as excerpted below:
> > Le Mercredi 30 Juillet 2003 17:42, John van Spaandonk a écrit :
> >
> > My reply to John is somewhere in the mail, other guys can simply delete
> > it. I want to know how many ti
Tomasz Chmielewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> I have a dsl connection, dynamic IP, and my provider changes my address every
> few hours.
> Whenever it happens, and I use urpmi in a meantime - urpmi just freezes.
>
> Maybe it's more of wget issue than of urpmi, but it would have been n
On Wed 30 Jul 2003 10:56, Olivier Thauvin posted as excerpted below:
> Le Mercredi 30 Juillet 2003 17:42, John van Spaandonk a écrit :
>
> My reply to John is somewhere in the mail, other guys can simply delete it.
> I want to know how many time he need to find it ;)
While I agree with your sugges
Hi,
I have a dsl connection, dynamic IP, and my provider changes my address
every few hours.
Whenever it happens, and I use urpmi in a meantime - urpmi just freezes.
Maybe it's more of wget issue than of urpmi, but it would have been nice
r if urpmi checks from time to time if something is real
John van Spaandonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Next, made a bug report if possible, and cut the uneed lines...
> Good that you use the words "if possible".
> Currently I am not able to file a bug report,
> bugzilla complains about a missing legal version
Olivier was talking about --bug option
Once again - right on the money about off-loading responsibility.
Bob
On Wednesday 30 July 2003 11:17 am, Levi Ramsey wrote:
> On Wed Jul 30 14:52 +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
> > You're going to have to be more specific. Which auto-generated deps?
> > library deps (which have been in place for a
On Wednesday 30 July 2003 19:56, Olivier Thauvin wrote:
> Le Mercredi 30 Juillet 2003 17:42, John van Spaandonk a écrit :
>
> My reply to John is somewhere in the mail, other guys can simply delete it.
> I want to know how many time he need to find it ;)
>
>
> Next, made a bug report if possible,
Le Mercredi 30 Juillet 2003 17:42, John van Spaandonk a écrit :
My reply to John is somewhere in the mail, other guys can simply delete it.
I want to know how many time he need to find it ;)
> Hi all,
>
> See this copy of my terminal session of 10 minutes ago...
>
> It contains several things I d
Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would guess it's something like this:
>
> >50% perl deps that don't exist
> >30% epoch problems
> >15% packages which need rebuilding against a new library (which is
> something we can't drop unless you want people to have broken software)
> <5% -devel
On Wed Jul 30 18:42 +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
> > To some extent, I'm not keen on the idea of automatic dependencies;
> > afaik, debian (to pick the most prominent distribution) seems to get by
> > fine on about 3 million platforms without an auto-deps system (the fact
> > that no package gets upl
Hi all,
See this copy of my terminal session of 10 minutes ago...
It contains several things I do not understand:
- segmentation fault
- At one point I had installed two versions of kdenetwork
- Some strange interdependencies
I seemed to have installed everything in the end
What other informat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Levi Ramsey wrote:
> On Wed Jul 30 14:52 +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
> To some extent, I'm not keen on the idea of automatic dependencies;
> afaik, debian (to pick the most prominent distribution) seems to get by
> fine on about 3 million platforms wit
On Wed Jul 30 14:52 +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
> You're going to have to be more specific. Which auto-generated deps?
> library deps (which have been in place for a long time, was it 9.0?),
> devel deps (which seem to be ok now), perl deps (which we inherited from
> Redhat who had them for RH 9 I t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Levi Ramsey wrote:
>
> The main problems at the moment involve broken rpm autogenerated
> dependencies. To be completely honest, I think that auto-deps are a bad
> idea; the situation wasn't that bad before, right now it's worse, and I
> don't think
Bingo !!
Yep that is obviously the issue extent.
Bob
On Wednesday 30 July 2003 02:08 am, Levi Ramsey wrote:
> First of all, please do not post with Reply-To: set...
>
> On Wed Jul 30 2:05 +0200, lolomin wrote:
> > answer, but i'm always amazed of this ( in a precedent message you were
> > als
First of all, please do not post with Reply-To: set...
On Wed Jul 30 2:05 +0200, lolomin wrote:
> answer, but i'm always amazed of this ( in a precedent message you were
> also advising to upgrade perl-URPM manually to solve failure of urpmi
> while upgrading some packages )
Generally in those
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
lolomin wanted us to know:
>What is the meaning of urpmi if we have to upgrade manually every week
>at least one package and by the way find which package we have to
>upgrade ( because that's never a simple thing for the "normal user" to
This is Cook
Hello
using cooker for now 6 months and not the first time i saw this type of
answer, but i'm always amazed of this ( in a precedent message you were
also advising to upgrade perl-URPM manually to solve failure of urpmi
while upgrading some packages )
What is the meaning of urpmi if we have to u
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
w9ya wrote:
> Ug
>
> (sigh)
???
- --
|--Another happy Mandrake Club member--|
Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager
Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202
Stellenbosch A
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (François Pons) writes:
> So urpmi works correctly (relative to rpm) and is not broken, but gaim need to
> be fixed with a requires on perl-base = 2:5.8.0.
ok, done
Ug
(sigh)
On Tuesday 29 July 2003 05:10 am, Buchan Milne wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Luca Berra wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 11:07:52PM +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
> >> Well, if you have any other packages broken by kerberos, grab
> >> libcom_err.so.3 fr
Levi Ramsey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue Jul 29 10:35 +0100, Eric Fernandez wrote:
> > OK, thanks, I shall do it this way now. I've read other people have reported
> > the gaim problem from this morning, it must be reproducible then. Keep the
> > good work :)
>
> I've seen the gaim/perl-b
Levi Ramsey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue Jul 29 10:35 +0100, Eric Fernandez wrote:
> > OK, thanks, I shall do it this way now. I've read other people have reported
> > the gaim problem from this morning, it must be reproducible then. Keep the
> > good work :)
>
> I've seen the gaim/perl-b
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Luca Berra wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 11:07:52PM +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
>
>> Well, if you have any other packages broken by kerberos, grab
>> libcom_err.so.3 from http://ranger.dnsalias.com/mandrake/cooker/
>
>
> or better
> http://percy.come
On Tue Jul 29 10:35 +0100, Eric Fernandez wrote:
> OK, thanks, I shall do it this way now. I've read other people have reported
> the gaim problem from this morning, it must be reproducible then. Keep the
> good work :)
I've seen the gaim/perl-base issues for a few weeks now... basic problem
is th
"Eric Fernandez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >Anyway, when you can get such behaviour, please make a bug report using
> urpmi
> >because I may not be capable of reproducing them, bug report have been done
> for
> >that, please use them.
>
> OK, but how can I do when the update has already been
>
> At least when something seems wrong, restart using --bug.
>
> Some people use --bug all the time, and when something is wrong, send the
bug
> report. It may be hard to use efficiently, especially when a cron is used
for
> that, the first approach is far better than nothing, but if I manage to
>Anyway, when you can get such behaviour, please make a bug report using
urpmi
>because I may not be capable of reproducing them, bug report have been done
for
>that, please use them.
OK, but how can I do when the update has already been done ?
Should I use urpmi --bug each time I want to use urp
"Eric Fernandez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Another urpmi weirdness : this morning, I wanted to update perl, perl-URPM
> and urpmi. Strangely, it had to remove gaim (because perl was not
> version-matching). So it removed gaim and installed the updates. However, I
> did urpmi gaim and it instal
Another urpmi weirdness : this morning, I wanted to update perl, perl-URPM
and urpmi. Strangely, it had to remove gaim (because perl was not
version-matching). So it removed gaim and installed the updates. However, I
did urpmi gaim and it installed it without any problem then.
This is strange behav
On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 11:07:52PM +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
Well, if you have any other packages broken by kerberos, grab
libcom_err.so.3 from http://ranger.dnsalias.com/mandrake/cooker/
or better
http://percy.comedia.it/~bluca/cooker/libcom_err3-1.2.7-0mdk.i586.rpm
which will also keep urpmi ha
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, David M. Kobler wrote:
> urpmi sendmail is not working as of Friday, is there any plans to fix this
> problem anytime soon?
>
>
>
>From what I can see, sendmail's issue stems from the libcom_err issue
mentioned previously and cyrus-sasl.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# urpmi
sorry for the lack of details
urpmi sendmail
Some package requested cannot be installed:
cyrus-sasl-2.1.15-1mdk.i586 (due to unsatisfied libcom_err.so.3)
sendmail-8.12.9-5mdk.i586 (due to missing cyrus-sasl-2.1.15-1mdk.i586) (Y/n)
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 05:50:58PM -0500, David M. Kobler w
On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 05:50:58PM -0500, David M. Kobler wrote:
> urpmi sendmail is not working as of Friday, is there any plans to fix
> this problem anytime soon?
Giving more detailed information on what's failing (like the error
message) might get it fixed sooner.
--
Ben Reser <[EMAIL PROTEC
urpmi sendmail is not working as of Friday, is there any plans to fix this
problem anytime soon?
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Except that was no use in the given situation, because I ended up with
> the new Kerberos installed along with my old Evolution package, which
> really truly didn't work any more (it needed a rebuild against
> Kerberos). You can't assume that when a pa
On Mon, 2003-07-28 at 15:37, Charles A Edwards wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 14:51:31 +0200
> Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I don't believe in this features, since all available docs tells me
> > there is no such feature ;-).
>
> Good for you Buchan because it does not work in this
On Mon, 2003-07-28 at 13:51, Buchan Milne wrote:
> Of course, I think Adam was looking for a message:
>
> "The following packages have to be removed for others to be upgraded:
> evolution-1.4.3-1mdk.i586 (due to missing libcom_err.so.3), or you can
> upgrade (U) all packages which won't force uni
On Mon, 2003-07-28 at 15:37, Charles A Edwards wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 14:51:31 +0200
> Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I don't believe in this features, since all available docs tells me
> > there is no such feature ;-).
>
> Good for you Buchan because it does not work in this
On Mon, 2003-07-28 at 16:36, François Pons wrote:
> Charles A Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 14:51:31 +0200
> > Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I don't believe in this features, since all available docs tells me
> > > there is no such feature ;-).
On Mon, 2003-07-28 at 12:42, François Pons wrote:
> Adam Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The following packages have to be removed for others to be upgraded:
> > evolution-1.4.3-1mdk.i586 (due to missing libcom_err.so.3) (y/N) n
> >
> > My options there are: hit Y and lose Evolution,
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 17:02:22 +0200
Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But I don't think this will work well in --auto ?
No, I would not use it with cron, and even using it manually it should
only be used most carefully as it negates all Conflicts and Obsoletes
flags.
Charles
--
"No
Charles A Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 14:51:31 +0200
> Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I don't believe in this features, since all available docs tells me
> > there is no such feature ;-).
>
> Good for you Buchan because it does not work in this situat
> "Stefan van der Eijk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Hello,
>
> Hello,
>
>> I'm having some issues with urpmi lately. Take a look here:
>>
>> http://eijk.homelinux.org/build/cooker/urpmi/i586/k3b-0.9-2mdk
>
> There is a strange
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Charles A Edwards wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 14:51:31 +0200
> What will work, where there are pkgs which will be removed but that you
> wish to retain, is 'urpmi --auto-select --allow--nodeps --allow-force'
But I don't think this will work well in
101 - 200 of 1217 matches
Mail list logo
