On 1/27/10 12:20 AM, protector wrote:
> Hello Debian team.
>
> I've got even a very specific question for you.
>
> Is it possible to download somewhere in the ARM version of Debian
> Sarge? I am aware that this version is very old, but I need exactly
> this.
Hell
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 12:20:55AM +0100, protector wrote:
> Hello Debian team.
>
> I've got even a very specific question for you.
>
> Is it possible to download somewhere in the ARM version of Debian
> Sarge? I am aware that this version is very old, but I need
Hello Debian team.
I've got even a very specific question for you.
Is it possible to download somewhere in the ARM version of Debian
Sarge? I am aware that this version is very old, but I need exactly
this.
Best regards
Marcel Lehmann
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project
On Monday 21 April 2008, Thiemann Daniel wrote:
> i am searching für a download link für Debian 3.1 Sarge. Could you help
> me, cause i didnt find it.
http://www.debian.org/releases/sarge/debian-installer/
Cheers,
FJP
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Dear Daniel,
Am 21.4.2008 schrieb "Thiemann Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>i am searching für a download link für Debian 3.1 Sarge. Could you help me,
>cause i didnt find it.
You can download Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 at
http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/archive/3.1_r8/
Ple
Sarge. Could you help me,
cause i didnt find it.
El jue, 20-10-2005 a las 21:32 +0200, Adrian von Bidder escribió:
> On Thursday 20 October 2005 04.36, Horms wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 07:34:00PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > > For the 2.2 is written here http://www.us.debian.org/releases/potato/
> > > the following :
> > > "Debi
On Thursday 20 October 2005 04.36, Horms wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 07:34:00PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > For the 2.2 is written here http://www.us.debian.org/releases/potato/
> > the following :
> > "Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 has been obsoleted by Debian GNU/Linux 3.0
> > ("woody"). Sec
On Saturday 06 August 2005 18:23, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
| That was typo. Correct url is http://www.debian.org/banners/
thanks, Bartosz :-)
Siward
(home.wanadoo.nl/siward)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTEC
On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 06:17:21PM +0200, Siward de Groot wrote:
> | > Looks very nice indeed. I've added it to
> | > http://www.debian.org/banner/
>
> Hi all,
>
> when i point my browser at that address,
> i get a
>Not Found
>The requested URL /banner/ was not found on this s
On Friday 05 August 2005 19:40, Romain Lorquet-Marciel wrote:
| Martin Schulze wrote:
| > Looks very nice indeed. I've added it to
| > http://www.debian.org/banner/
Hi all,
when i point my browser at that address,
i get a
Not Found
The requested URL /banner/ was not found on
t; advices... (I wasn't long work but I spend time far from home
>>> ^^)
>>
>> Looks very nice to me. Maybe you should change the order from
>> "debian sarge 3.1" to "debian 3.1 sarge".
>
>
> Looks very nice indeed. I've added it to
&g
ry nice to me. Maybe you should change the order from "debian
> sarge 3.1" to "debian 3.1 sarge".
Looks very nice indeed. I've added it to http://www.debian.org/banner/
Regards,
Joey
--
Reading is a lost art nowadays. -- Michael Weber
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, e
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
si tu mets xorg sur Sarge ou Etch, tu vas FORCEMENT les changer de
nature, vu que les paquets xorg sont sur unstable...
sinon il suffit de faire
apt-get install xorg
(il ya un meilleur tuto sur andesit)
rl
kim nguyen wrote:
> Bonjour,
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
New versions are available ^^
I used the same font for "sarge" and "3.1" and I tried to align them...
rl
Christian Kaenzig wrote:
> Le Mardi, 2 Août 2005 09:26, feanor a écrit :
>
>> I made new version of my
n better.
But as someone pointed out the last time you posted on project about this, in
my opinion it still lacks some alignment. It just seems a little bit...
messy.
I think you should try to top-align "debian" (top of 'an'), "sarge" and "3.1".
You shou
feanor wrote:
> I made new version of my banner !
> You can check them here : http://free.rlmh.net/ban/
> Give me your preferences, comments, advices...
> (I wasn't long work but I spend time far from home ^^)
Looks very nice to me. Maybe you should change the order from &quo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I made new version of my banner !
You can check them here : http://free.rlmh.net/ban/
Give me your preferences, comments, advices...
(I wasn't long work but I spend time far from home ^^)
I Changed fonts and slogan !
(I'm sorry I didn't managed to ant
Hello,
Another positive review:
http://www.linux-magazine.com/issue/58/Debian_31_Sarge_Review.pdf
"Debian developers coded, talked, and postponed deadlines for 35 months
until Debian 3.1, alias Sarge, finally saw the light of the Linux day.
The list of new features is impressive, incl
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 04:13:28PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> To accept aptitude fully, it should suppoert the
> "--purge" option of apt-get because I do not like
> tonns of old configs laying around...
This is a technical issue and should be discussed on a techical mailing
list, but not on
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 05:01:56PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Am 2005-07-15 16:28:10, schrieb René van Bevern:
> > On 15.07.05, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> >
> > Hi Michelle,
> >
> > > To accept aptitude fully, it should suppoert the
> > > "--purge" option of apt-get because I do not lik
Am 2005-07-15 16:34:59, schrieb Remi Vanicat:
> "aptitude purge" does the trick
But there is no equivalent option for /etc/apt/apt.conf
Greetings
Michelle
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
Am 2005-07-15 16:28:10, schrieb René van Bevern:
> On 15.07.05, Michelle Konzack wrote:
>
> Hi Michelle,
>
> > To accept aptitude fully, it should suppoert the
> > "--purge" option of apt-get because I do not like
> > tonns of old configs laying around...
>
> It does. As "aptitude help" might ha
Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Am 2005-07-15 14:06:52, schrieb Florian Weimer:
>> * René van Bevern:
>>
>> > The "apt-get into it" is hard to read because the space between each
>> > letter is almost as much as the space between each word.
>>
>> It's also a bit unfortunate becaus
On 15.07.05, Michelle Konzack wrote:
Hi Michelle,
> To accept aptitude fully, it should suppoert the
> "--purge" option of apt-get because I do not like
> tonns of old configs laying around...
It does. As "aptitude help" might have shown you, there is "aptitude
purge package-name".
René
p
Am 2005-07-15 14:06:52, schrieb Florian Weimer:
> * René van Bevern:
>
> > The "apt-get into it" is hard to read because the space between each
> > letter is almost as much as the space between each word.
>
> It's also a bit unfortunate because we recommend to use aptitude.
To accept aptitude fu
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * René van Bevern:
>
>> The "apt-get into it" is hard to read because the space between each
>> letter is almost as much as the space between each word.
>
> It's also a bit unfortunate because we recom
* René van Bevern:
> On 15.07.05, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * René van Bevern:
>> > The "apt-get into it" is hard to read because the space between each
>> > letter is almost as much as the space between each word.
>> It's also a bit unfortunate because we recommend to use aptitude.
>
> What I said
On 15.07.05, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * René van Bevern:
> > The "apt-get into it" is hard to read because the space between each
> > letter is almost as much as the space between each word.
> It's also a bit unfortunate because we recommend to use aptitude.
What I said in the following sentece. ;)
* René van Bevern:
> The "apt-get into it" is hard to read because the space between each
> letter is almost as much as the space between each word.
It's also a bit unfortunate because we recommend to use aptitude.
Hi,
* René van Bevern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-15 13:29]:
> On 15.07.05, feanor wrote:
> > What do you think of it ?
>
> Quite nice, the Swirl could need some antialiasing though.
>
> The "apt-get into it" is hard to read because the space between each
> letter is almost as much as the space
On 15.07.05, feanor wrote:
Hi,
> What do you think of it ?
Quite nice, the Swirl could need some antialiasing though.
The "apt-get into it" is hard to read because the space between each
letter is almost as much as the space between each word.
Further, "aptitude" is recommended instead of "apt-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Re: feanor in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> http://www.rlmh.net/debian-sarge-2005.png
>
> What do you think of it ?
The spacing of the text is weird. And using multiple exclamtion marks
is bad style.
The rest looks nice, I wouldn&#x
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I've just looked at Debian banner's page
(http://www.debian.org/banners/) and I couldn't find a banner for
Sarge They are all quite old, for Woody, or even Potato !
So I decided to draw a new banner, especially for Sarge :
http
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05-07-2005 13:13, Michael Rasmussen wrote:
> I send the attached forward message for more than 2 weeks ago to the
> maintainer of the postfix package but have not received any response. Is
> this package not maintained by Lamont Jones anymore?
Bes
ed actively.
[1] http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting
[2] http://packages.qa.debian.org/p/postfix.html
Giridhar
> Forwarded Message
> > From: Michael Rasmussen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Patch suggest for postfix rc-ini
; To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Patch suggest for postfix rc-init.d script in Sarge
> Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 01:29:01 +0200
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a suggestion to a patch for the rc-init.d script for postfix in
> Sarge. Patch at the end of this email.
>
> The patch s
* MJ Ray:
> You have your view, but some of us do think ownership has an
> effect on editorial policy and your mud-slinging is ill-aimed.
It has, but it doesn't cover the answer to the question whether IBM's
Linux or Microsoft's Windows is better. 8-)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECT
Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005, MJ Ray wrote:
> > Tinfoil-hat? It's not as if I'm the only one questioning who owns
> > the media these days. [...]
> It's not really relevant. [...] the raving of kooks.
You have your view, but some of us do think ownership has an
effect on editorial
Dave Hornford wrote: [...]
> The 'news' was Debian shipped unready & with a security vulnerability.
If shipping without automatic detection of security updates is a
vulnerability now, there are many vulnerable systems out there.
[...]
> No one from the mainstream media will read a Debian list for
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005, MJ Ray wrote:
Tinfoil-hat? It's not as if I'm the only one questioning who owns
the media these days. http://www.freepress.net/
http://www.mediatrademonitor.org/ http://www.openairwaves.org/ and so on.
I thought the "page views" bit was obvious. The ownership and ad-base
me
Mainstream media hears that Open Source is less vulnerable to security
risks & ( to the extent they hear anything about Debian) that Sarge
wouldn't ship until 'it was ready'.
The 'news' was Debian shipped unready & with a security vulnerability.
Yes it was,dis
Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005, MJ Ray wrote:
> > ZDnet is owned by CNET Networks, which has links to Microsoft
> Well so does Bruce Perens if you read the post that started this thread :-)
Yes, and Bruce's own explanation of his questionable business
can be found linked at http://ww
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005, MJ Ray wrote:
ZDnet is owned by CNET Networks, which has links to Microsoft
Well so does Bruce Perens if you read the post that started this thread :-)
A less tinfoil-hat explanation is that inflammatory stories like this
will get tons of page views from outraged Debian
Martin Schulze wrote:
> Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > I'm beginning to wonder what ZDNet have against us at this point...
> Not sure, but maybe they're just reading the "wrong" lists? Or
> we're just distributing the "wrong" content?
ZDnet is owned by CNET Networks, which has links to Microsoft
co-fo
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >Headline: Debian upgrade may 'break' systems
> >
> >Quote: "I expect around 30 percent of users will suffer serious breakage
> > that could have been avoided"
> >
> >http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/0,261733,39196419,00.htm
> >
> >The article refers to
> >htt
Hi,
so, let's start collecting Sarge reviews here, unless somebody thinks
-project is better suited for other things.
Bruce Byfield has written a review on Newsforge:
http://os.newsforge.com/os/05/06/10/1512236.shtml?tid=2
"As the first Debian release to use the new installer, v
Joey wrote:
>
>Headline: Debian upgrade may 'break' systems
>
>Quote: "I expect around 30 percent of users will suffer serious breakage
> that could have been avoided"
>
>http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/0,261733,39196419,00.htm
>
>The article refers to
>http://lists.debian.org/debia
Martin Schulze wrote:
> Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> > This needs to be done fast, so that journalists and other interested
> > parties that want to follow up on this "news" also get our side
> > of the story. Otherwise we leave them with only the ZDnet side of
> > the story.
>
> Where is the prob
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 02:25:36PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> > My only proposal is to urgently bring the information of which version
> > is the current "stable" version in line on the different pages under
> > http://www.debian.org. At this moment (Friday 12:42 p
Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 07:18:04PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> > > This needs to be done fast, so that journalists and other interested
> > > parties that want to follow up on this "news" also get our side
> > > of the story. Otherwise we
On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, Enrico Zini wrote:
On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 06:40:09PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
I'm more concerned about user confusion than about
what ZDnet happens to be saying.
Nevertheless, a tiny press release correcting the ZDNet news would be
useful. Something along the line of:
On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 07:18:04PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> > This needs to be done fast, so that journalists and other interested
> > parties that want to follow up on this "news" also get our side
> > of the story. Otherwise we leave them with only the ZDnet side
misreports Debian security
In this[1] article, ZDNet wrongly reported that Debian is dropping
security support for Sarge. This is of course wrong, as explained in
this announcement[link] about the incident.
[1] http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5737401.html
[2] http://lists.debian.org/d
On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 05:02:08PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> > For reasons of PR, I would suggest to urgently update at least
> > the main site and the News site with version 3.1 r0a (under News
> > on the main section). You might also link to a text that correctly
> > de
On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 07:18:04PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> > This needs to be done fast, so that journalists and other interested
> > parties that want to follow up on this "news" also get our side
> > of the story. Otherwise we leave them with only the ZDnet side
Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> This needs to be done fast, so that journalists and other interested
> parties that want to follow up on this "news" also get our side
> of the story. Otherwise we leave them with only the ZDnet side of
> the story.
Where is the problem? We cannot correct everything a
Michael Banck wrote:
> MJ Ray wrote:
> > ZDnet are being silly.
> Sure, but they wrote it and people read it. And now they will think
> 'Ugh, sarge? Wasn't that this thing which has no security?'. There is
> obviously a problem here, and just saying that ZDn
Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> For reasons of PR, I would suggest to urgently update at least
> the main site and the News site with version 3.1 r0a (under News
> on the main section). You might also link to a text that correctly
> describes our view on what happened and how it was repaired.
>
> T
On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 03:51:41PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > There was a devel-announce about it as soon as it was discovered.
>
> Additionally, it was sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
> is visible on http://www.debian.org/CD/releases/ - had anyone
> actually had time to download, burn and sell these
> There was a devel-announce about it as soon as it was discovered.
Additionally, it was sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
is visible on http://www.debian.org/CD/releases/ - had anyone
actually had time to download, burn and sell these before the
notice was sent? (I didn't send mine yet.)
--
MJ Ray
On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 03:47:47PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> > Well, Sarge == stable _did_ make it to the news now, but
> > probably not as we have hoped ... My ZDnet news agent mailed
> > me this item this morning:
> > "Debia
Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> Well, Sarge == stable _did_ make it to the news now, but
> probably not as we have hoped ... My ZDnet news agent mailed
> me this item this morning:
> "Debian drops ball on security updates"
[...]
> I searched this morning and found n
On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 01:51:40PM +, Thaddeus H. Black wrote:
> So on the day sarge releases, the big news in the
> free-software world is, "Bruce Perens gets a job?"
Well, Sarge == stable _did_ make it to the news now, but
probably not as we have hoped ... My ZDnet news
On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, Thaddeus H. Black wrote:
When I called, voice mail picked up, and I
did leave a voice message combining Peter's structure
and points with Michael's solid content. Whether the
reporter Guth phones me back, indeed whether we get any
response at all, remains to be seen;
I hig
On 6/8/05, Thaddeus H. Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter, Michael, your responses were immensely helpful.
> Thank you. When I called, voice mail picked up, and I
> did leave a voice message combining Peter's structure
> and points with Michael's solid content. Whether the
> reporter Guth p
Peter, Michael, your responses were immensely helpful.
Thank you. When I called, voice mail picked up, and I
did leave a voice message combining Peter's structure
and points with Michael's solid content. Whether the
reporter Guth phones me back, indeed whether we get any
response at all, remains
On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 01:51:40PM +, Thaddeus H. Black wrote:
...
> I lack past experience in media relations. I don't
> really know what to say. I don't think that, "Get a
> clue, dude" would help. Suggestions?
* _start_ the discussion on the positi
On 6/8/05, Thaddeus H. Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have obtained the reporter Guth's work phone number
> and do mean to phone him when he reaches his desk this
> morning. He's on U.S. Pacific Time (GMT minus 0700).
> Have you any suggestion as to what I should say?
Tell 'im, Debian "unst
a year old.
Now, this is okay, I guess. We thrive without broad
publicity. Probably it is better this way. However,
yesterday morning I poked the WSJ tech editor about
sarge. Steve Langasek even made himself available to
answer questions if needed. I do not know whether the
WSJ ever contacted S
Goodbye Woody, Welcome Sarge!
In the FISL6.0 (fisl.softwarelivre.org) was the "Woody's Goodbye" on
Debian's Stand. Thank you Woody, thank you Debian Developers, Thank
you Debian Comunity!!!
2005/6/7, Branden Robinson / Debian Project Leader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I&#
I'd like to extend my thanks and congratulations to everyone affiliated
with the Debian Project for making the long-awaited Sarge release a
reality.
My first inclination was to advise taking a moment to pat ourselves on the
back, but you don't need my encouragement to do so. Furthermo
Taha Nazari wrote:
what is the release date of the stable version of Debian Srage 3.1
Please refer to [1], it will be updated if anything changes. Currently
May 30, 2005 is the planned release date.
Kind regards,
Philipp Kern
[1] http://www.nl.debian.org/releases/sarge/
--
To
Hi
what is the release date of the stable version of Debian Srage 3.1
thanks
good wishes
taha-- Regards,T.E. NazariLinboy Admin AssistantW W W . L I N B O Y . C O M---[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 01:26:10PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
>
> > * Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-31
> > 22:21]:
> > > I'm forwarding the following message (with permission) so people can
> > > comment on it.
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-31
> 22:21]:
> > I'm forwarding the following message (with permission) so people can
> > comment on it.
>
> Is anyone going to respond?
Let's try:
When I read "apparent buggin
* Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-31
22:21]:
> I'm forwarding the following message (with permission) so people can
> comment on it.
Is anyone going to respond?
--
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
things like aptitude.
- Forwarded message from William Alan Larson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: William Alan Larson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Sarge Concerns
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:04:12 -0600
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To whom it may concern:
Concerns I have about Sarge.
W
Selon Cristi Savu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I have a very simple question I'd like to ask, and I'm sorry to bother
> you for this: Does the Sarge ISO package get updated on a regular basis
> (let's say, monthly or something) ?
The DVD & CD iso images
Hi,
please read the following pages, sarge=testing and sarge will become stable,
when it's ready... and unstable will always be called sid.
http://www.debian.org/releases/
http://www.debian.org/devel/testing
regards,
Holger
pgpAoclZFb7ju.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Dear gentlemen
I have a very simple question I'd like to ask, and
I'm sorry to bother you for this: Does the Sarge ISO package get updated on a
regular basis (let's say, monthly or something) ?
I'm asking this because I want to know whether is
there any point to d
* Thomas Jollans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050103 13:07]:
> > the Debian release after sarge will be called 'etch'.
> Who is etch? (I assume alsofrom Toy Story, but haven't seen it for a
> long time...)
See [1] for a picture.
Yours sincerely,
Alexander
Links:
Thomas Jollans wrote:
> >>By the way, when will Sarge be releasedm and what is the codename
> >>of next release? Everyone is expecting to know...
> >
> > the Debian release after sarge will be called 'etch'.
> Who is etch? (I assume al
On 2005-01-01 11:27:57 +0100 Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Grace or Gnuplot). So if Sarge go without KDE 3.3, there would be great
pity. For these applications, I have mixed some unstable packages into my
system, so the apt system do not work unless 1. Someday KDE3.3 c
> Grace or Gnuplot). So if Sarge go without KDE 3.3, there would be great
> pity. For these applications, I have mixed some unstable packages into
> my system, so the apt system do not work unless 1. Someday KDE3.3 come
> to testing, 2. I dare myself to use complete source fr
Dear Debians,
Kst and labplot are very interest scientific application in KDE
3.3. I think they are really important (seems to be much usable than
Grace or Gnuplot). So if Sarge go without KDE 3.3, there would be great
pity. For these applications, I have mixed some
Flávio, a lista do debian-project é uma lista
em inglês. Não há previsão nem datas para o lançamento da
próxima versão do Debian (Sarge - 3.1), o que dizemos é
que será lançado quando ficar pronto! :o)
Para listas em português você pode utilizar a
debian-user-portuguese em lists.deb
Quando será lançado essa versão do Debian ?
--
__
Flávio de Oliveira Barros
Analista de Suporte - AGANP
Governo de Goiás
Diretoria de Informática e TI
+55 (62)201-6582
Hi!
Le jeudi 18 novembre 2004 à 15h26 (+0100), Fabrice Gomez écrivait :
> I have just a question:
> when will sarge be available in "stable" version?
Usual answer is: when it is ready! ;-)
If you want more information about releases in the "Debian way",
pl
Title: sarge
Hi,
I have just a question:
when will sarge be available in "stable" version?
Thanks
On Mon 11 Oct, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Chris Bell:
>
> > The earlier 1.3.x version may not be perfect, but it does work for
> > me, and I have not found any other software that does the same job.
>
> AFAIK, apt-proxy 1.9 is only required if you have apt 0.6 somewhere on
> your site. apt-pro
* Chris Bell:
> The earlier 1.3.x version may not be perfect, but it does work for
> me, and I have not found any other software that does the same job.
AFAIK, apt-proxy 1.9 is only required if you have apt 0.6 somewhere on
your site. apt-proxy 1.3 is fine with apt 0.5, but much too often, it
re
On Thu, 23 Sep 2004, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 23-09-2004 15:50, Chris Bell wrote:
> |The current Sarge has neither the stable version of apt-proxy nor the
> | development version 1.9.18 currently only in Sid. Is there a reason why
> | neither version is included in the c
On Thu 23 Sep, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 23-09-2004 18:42, Chris Bell wrote:
> | On Thu 23 Sep, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> |
> |>
> |>On 23-09-2004 15:50, Chris Bell wrote:
> |>
> |>|The current Sarge has neither the stable version of apt-proxy nor the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 23-09-2004 18:42, Chris Bell wrote:
| On Thu 23 Sep, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
|
|>
|>On 23-09-2004 15:50, Chris Bell wrote:
|>
|>|The current Sarge has neither the stable version of apt-proxy nor the
|>| development version 1
On Thu 23 Sep, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
>
> On 23-09-2004 15:50, Chris Bell wrote:
>
> | The current Sarge has neither the stable version of apt-proxy nor the
> | development version 1.9.18 currently only in Sid. Is there a reason why
> | neither version is included
On Thu 23 Sep, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 23-09-2004 15:50, Chris Bell wrote:
>
> |The current Sarge has neither the stable version of apt-proxy nor the
> | development version 1.9.18 currently only in Si
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 23-09-2004 15:50, Chris Bell wrote:
|The current Sarge has neither the stable version of apt-proxy nor the
| development version 1.9.18 currently only in Sid. Is there a reason why
| neither version is included in the current Sarge-testing
Hello,
The current Sarge has neither the stable version of apt-proxy nor the
development version 1.9.18 currently only in Sid. Is there a reason why
neither version is included in the current Sarge-testing? I feel that it
would be a mistake to omit both versions from Sarge when it is released
also sprach Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.04.15.0328 +0200]:
> > > Right now, if you want to help release sarge, go and get the installer
> > > working everywhere it needs to work (even disregarding this issue).
>
> > Yes, rather than cleaning c
1 - 100 of 124 matches
Mail list logo
