On 11 May 2005, 00:40, Ed Cogburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because its already been done. mtms announced earlier that he's keeping a
mirror of our old non-free. And he's not going to get sued by anyone either.
Wait a mo! Not me, bytekeeper.as28747.net keeps the mirror. I'm not
involved with
On Wednesday 11 May 2005 1:59am, mtms wrote:
On 11 May 2005, 00:40, Ed Cogburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because its already been done. mtms announced earlier that he's keeping
a mirror of our old non-free. And he's not going to get sued by anyone
either.
Wait a mo! Not me,
Ed Cogburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(Note to others: if you want to attack and ridicule me some more, you'll need
to CC me, as I'm not longer subscribed to this list)
Thank god.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ed Cogburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sunday 08 May 2005 4:23pm, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Ed Tomlinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sunday 08 May 2005 09:27, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
On 10283 March 1977, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
Whats going on == someone needs to check it. Thats it.
Hi everybody,
I'm only have a doubt, if someone make a mirror of the official debian
(including non-free) and all that packages are ditributed is in danger
to being sued?
Accordingly with Goswin that's nothing about complain, only the main
server of the distribution don't have non-free, the main
(I'm not subscribed to this list, so please CC me)
As you all certainly know, the archive moved from alioth to somewhere else.
Sadly, this has had the side effect that buildd.net update scripts are
failing in obtaining the necessary files since then:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:]~$ wget -N
but sshd.conf contains the needed
flags to limit the authentication methods
doing man sshd_config saids something like :
UsePAM = yes
PasswordAuthentication = no
might do the trick
PasswordAuthentication is set to no by default, as enabling it causes
cleartext password authentication
* Ed Cogburn
| We ARE Debian for Heaven's sake!
I can't see that you've done anything at all for the AMD64 port, nor
are you a DD. Please go troll somewhere else.
--
Tollef Fog Heen,''`.
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who
Any chance this list will ever be offered in the digest format that
debian-user debian-devel enjoy?
Thanks.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wednesday 11 May 2005 11:46, dylanby wrote:
Any chance this list will ever be offered in the digest format that
debian-user debian-devel enjoy?
Thanks.
Two words: procmail and cron :)
--
AJS
deb64 at earthshod dot co dot uk
* made without god *
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
I have compiled and installed nvidia driver (7174). When I start my system,
xfree86 exits and returns this error:
(EE) NVIDIA(0): *** Aborting ***
(II) UnloadModule: nvidia
(EE) Screen(s) found, but none have a usable configuration.
Fatal server error:
no screens found
If I
Ed Cogburn wrote:
Because its already been done. mtms announced earlier that he's keeping a
mirror of our old non-free. And he's not going to get sued by anyone either.
If there's already a mirror available of amd64 non-free, then what on
earth are you complaining about? Just use the
Hello List,
Today I decided to run an apt-get upgrade for the first time since
setting up AMD64-debian a couple of months ago.
Out of the 161 packages needed to be upgraded, 10 failed because of
MD5Sum mismatch errors. I haven't come across this type of error before
and I was hoping someone
The MD5 Summ dismiss to the xfce4-themes_4.0.6-1_all.deb
Can anybody fix it?
Thanks Alex
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 09:58:57AM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
(I'm not subscribed to this list, so please CC me)
As you all certainly know, the archive moved from alioth to somewhere else.
Sadly, this has had the side effect that buildd.net update scripts are
failing in obtaining the
On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 05:52:09PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
It's available on amd64.debian.net/buildd
Works again. Thx.
--
Ciao... // Fon: 0381-2744150
Ingo \X/SIP: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
Hi folks,
Anybody knows what has happened to the 32bit XWindow libs?
They disappeared from ia32-libs, as it seems. Is there a
new package I missed?
Regards
Harri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
apt-get install tftpd
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
The following NEW packages will be installed:
tftpd
0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 307 not upgraded.
Need to get 15.8kB of archives.
After unpacking 86.0kB of additional disk space will be used.
I was getting similar errors from ftp.de.debian.org as well. I switched
to the bytekeeper repository in Belgium and have encountered no errors
ever since.
On Wed, 2005-05-11 at 15:58 +0100, Monty Lilburn wrote:
Hello List,
Today I decided to run an apt-get upgrade for the first time since
Bob Proulx wrote:
sudo dchroot -c ia32
At that point you should be root in your chroot. Use su to load the
user environment. Where 'youruser' is your normal user account.
su - youruser
What does that say? I am guessing it will say no shell. Look to see
why. These commands
Is anybody able to run Abuse on pure64? Here it just consumes 100% CPU
without ever doing anything noticeable past displaying the following
messages:
Added himem block (3072000 bytes)
Memory available : 3071856
Abuse-SDL 0.7.0
Abuse (Version 2.00)
Sound : Disabled (couldn't find the sfx
El mi, 11-05-2005 a las 20:11 +0200, Alexander Fieroch escribi:
$ dchroot -c ia32 -d glxgears
(ia32) glxgears
dchroot: chroot: Operation not permitted
dchroot: Child exited non-zero.
dchroot: Operation failed.
What have I done wrong?
Is the dchroot binary suid? It should be if you intend
Michal Hajek wrote:
Hi,
same here. When I ran licq, click System-Options ... nothing happens.
I have windowmaker as well.
Thanks, I just have written a bug report.
Regards,
Alexander
Best regards
Michal
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
Javier Kohen wrote:
Is the dchroot binary suid? It should be if you intend to run it as a
regular user.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ls -l /usr/bin/dchroot
-rwsr-xr-x 1 root root 11432 2005-04-10 19:38 /usr/bin/dchroot
Ok, I set the suid bit to dchroot, but now I'm back to the last message:
$
El mi, 11-05-2005 a las 21:16 +0200, Alexander Fieroch escribi:
Javier Kohen wrote:
Is the dchroot binary suid? It should be if you intend to run it as a
regular user.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ls -l /usr/bin/dchroot
-rwsr-xr-x 1 root root 11432 2005-04-10 19:38 /usr/bin/dchroot
Ok, I
Javier Kohen wrote:
Is bash the user's shell?
The following should give you the shell that's currently set for that
user. Make sure it exists inside the chroot.
grep YOUR_USER_NAME PATH_TO_CHROOT/etc/passwd | cut -d : -f 7
Yes, it's /bin/bash and it is readable and executable:
-rwxr-xr-x 1
El mi, 11-05-2005 a las 22:31 +0200, Alexander Fieroch escribi:
Javier Kohen wrote:
Yes, it's /bin/bash and it is readable and executable:
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 611K Dec 19 17:53 /bin/bash
I also can chroot to my chroot-path as root and switch to the user. Then
I can start every
27 matches
Mail list logo
