in one partition. The default seems to be 512MB ext2 bootable /boot and
> then a large slice and 1G of swap.
>
> Eventually I see a big red box :
>
> [!!] Configure the package manager
> apt configuration problem
> An attempt to configure apt to install additional pack
imeout [IP: 2a04:4e42:58::644 80]
>> Jan 4 19:00:05 in-target:
>> Jan 4 19:00:05 in-target: E
>> Jan 4 19:00:05 in-target: :
>> Jan 4 19:00:05 in-target: Unable to fetch some archives, maybe run
>> apt-get update or try with --fix-missing?
>> Jan 4 19:00:05 in
On 1/9/21 2:33 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> May be possibly because I always use the "expert mode" option in the
> installer. That allows me to setup the network without DHCP.
Manual networking setup also works in normal mode. It will try DHCP first,
then fail and then offer manual configuration.
>
imeout [IP: 2a04:4e42:58::644 80]
>> Jan 4 19:00:05 in-target:
>> Jan 4 19:00:05 in-target: E
>> Jan 4 19:00:05 in-target: :
>> Jan 4 19:00:05 in-target: Unable to fetch some archives, maybe run
>> apt-get update or try with --fix-missing?
>> Jan 4 19:00:05 in
On 1/9/21 2:03 PM, Gregor Riepl wrote:
> The only situation where I can imagine this would happen is when the
> repositories have a newer version of the package than the installer
> image, and update to the latest version during installation is enabled
> (probably the default).
I have never run in
> I have no clue which image you used and I'm not sure what you did to end up
> in a situation
> where the installer would try to download the grub2 packages over the net
> which are actually
> on the installation ISO, so they don't have to be downloaded.
The only situation where I can imagine t
out [IP: 2a04:4e42:58::644 80]
Jan 4 19:00:05 in-target:
Jan 4 19:00:05 in-target: E
Jan 4 19:00:05 in-target: :
Jan 4 19:00:05 in-target: Unable to fetch some archives, maybe run
apt-get update or try with --fix-missing?
Jan 4 19:00:05 in-target:
Jan 4 19:00:05 grub-installer: info: Calling &
> Jan 4 19:00:05 in-target: Unable to fetch some archives, maybe run
> apt-get update or try with --fix-missing?
> Jan 4 19:00:05 in-target:
> Jan 4 19:00:05 grub-installer: info: Calling 'apt-install
> grub-ieee1275' failed
I have no clue which image you used and I'
I kinda figured that. I was trying to be clear in case someone else was
following along. My question still is, is it necessary to run
"update-initramfs -c -k 4.8.11" if "make install" performs that
function? Does make install do the same thing as the update-initramfs
command or do they do somethi
You don't need to go through all steps again. Just "make install" is enough.
Unless you call "make clean", the compiled files and kernel are still in the
kernel's source directory.
Adrian
> On Dec 2, 2016, at 7:45 PM, rod wrote:
>
>> On 12/2/2016 12:13 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>>
On 12/2/2016 12:13 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Did you run "make install" in the kernel's source directory after building
> kernel or did I forget mentioning it?
>
> Adrian
>
> PS: Sorry for the bad quoting style. Currently on mobile.
>
>> On Dec 2, 2016, at 7:05 PM, rod wrote:
>>
>
Did you run "make install" in the kernel's source directory after building
kernel or did I forget mentioning it?
Adrian
PS: Sorry for the bad quoting style. Currently on mobile.
> On Dec 2, 2016, at 7:05 PM, rod wrote:
>
>> On 12/2/2016 11:51 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>> Change the
On 12/2/2016 11:51 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Change the first SILO entry to:
>
> image=/boot/vmlinuz-4.8.11
>label=Linux
>initrd=/boot/initrd.img-4.8.11
>
> You simply forgot to modify silo.conf to point to the correct kernel and
> initrd.
>
> Currently it's configu
Change the first SILO entry to:
image=/boot/vmlinuz-4.8.11
label=Linux
initrd=/boot/initrd.img-4.8.11
You simply forgot to modify silo.conf to point to the correct kernel and initrd.
Currently it's configured to boot "vmlinuz" from the system's root directory
which is most likely
follow directions and read about what I don't understand so I CAN
understand whats going on.
I built the kernel following these directions (with Anatoly's
modification of 'make olddefconfig' because I was being lazy in not
wanting to hit ENTER alot. That may be my mistake and I wil
On 12/02/2016 04:35 PM, rod wrote:
> [0.00] PROMLIB: Sun IEEE Boot Prom 'OBP 4.22.33 2007/06/18 12:45'
> [0.00] PROMLIB: Root node compatible:
> [0.00] Linux version 4.8.0-1-sparc64-smp
> (debian-ker...@lists.debian.org) (gcc version 5.4.1 20161019 (Debian
> 5.4.1-3) ) #1 SM
On 11/30/2016 2:43 AM, Anatoly Pugachev wrote:
>> $ apt update
>> $ apt-get build-dep linux
>> $ cd /usr/src/
>> $ wget https://cdn.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/linux-4.8.11.tar.xz
>> $ tar xf linux-4.8.11.tar.xz
>> $ cd linux-4.8.11
>> $ cp -av /b
Source: apt
Version: 1.4~beta1
Severity: important
User: debian-ports-de...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: alpha m68k sh4 sparc64
Hello!
src:apt is currently BD-Uninstallable on alpha, m68k, sh4 and sparc64 because it
has a build-dependency on googletest which is not available on these
> $ apt update
> $ apt-get build-dep linux
> $ cd /usr/src/
> $ wget https://cdn.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/linux-4.8.11.tar.xz
> $ tar xf linux-4.8.11.tar.xz
> $ cd linux-4.8.11
> $ cp -av /boot/config-$(uname -r)
> $ make oldconfig (Just always until the prompt co
On 11/29/2016 11:43 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Try:
>
> $ apt update
> $ apt-get build-dep linux
> $ cd /usr/src/
> $ wget https://cdn.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/linux-4.8.11.tar.xz
> $ tar xf linux-4.8.11.tar.xz
> $ cd linux-4.8.11
> $ cp -av /boo
understanding of the process I'd be appreciative.
Try:
$ apt update
$ apt-get build-dep linux
$ cd /usr/src/
$ wget https://cdn.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/linux-4.8.11.tar.xz
$ tar xf linux-4.8.11.tar.xz
$ cd linux-4.8.11
$ cp -av /boot/config-$(uname -r)
$ make oldconfig (Just always
>> That's a bug I fixed, but it didn’t make it into the 4.8 branch until
>> 4.8.10[1]. Unfortunately that’s not yet been packaged for Debian. There
>> is 4.9~rc5-1~exp1 in experimental, but I haven’t tried that build, and I
>> don’t know if the serious regression of not being able to load kernel
>
...
>> Using the above thread and after installing several packages (apache2,
>> mariadb, phpmyadmin, webmin, & shellinabox and their associated
>> requirement packages); I got the following crash and had to reboot.
...
>> [ 3061.611384] \|/ \|/
>> [ 3061.611384] "
ilt with a fixed
>> version of binutils which should mitigate the problem.
>>
>> For anyone experiencing the issue, here is a quick workaround to fix apt
>> for the time being until the buildds have finished building the new gcc-6
>> package (which should be in arou
t with a fixed
>> version of binutils which should mitigate the problem.
>>
>> For anyone experiencing the issue, here is a quick workaround to fix apt
>> for the time being until the buildds have finished building the new gcc-6
>> package (which should be in around 2-3 h
nyone experiencing the issue, here is a quick workaround to fix apt
> for the time being until the buildds have finished building the new gcc-6
> package (which should be in around 2-3 hours).
>
> Fix:
>
> $ wget
> http://snapshot.debian.org/archive/debian-ports/20161022T004918
On 11/19/2016 01:13 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Ok, the last fix for binutils was yet not enough. The problem was supposedly
> introduced by this change in binutils [1]. We have reverted this change now
> completely and are rebuilding gcc-6 again.
This works now. Just make sure to insta
On 11/18/2016 11:32 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> This has turned out to be an issue with libstdc++6 which comes from the gcc-6
> package which was built with a broken version of binutils. The buildds are
> currently building a fresh gcc-6 package which is being built with a fixed
> versio
a broken version of binutils. The buildds are
currently building a fresh gcc-6 package which is being built with a fixed
version of binutils which should mitigate the problem.
For anyone experiencing the issue, here is a quick workaround to fix apt
for the time being until the buildds have finished
oblem I'm having is this:
>>>>>
>>>>> root@mw-monitor:/home/rod# aptitude
>>>>> Ouch! Got SIGSEGV, dying..
>>>>> Segmentation fault
>>>>>
>>>>> or
>>>>>
>>>>> root@mw-monitor:/home
ng debian for solaris to
>>>> reset the sc> password). It works well as written, covering all the
>>>> issues that came up.
>>>>
>>>> The current problem I'm having is this:
>>>>
>>>> root@mw-monitor:/home/ro
OK so new question...
Once I've done the reinstall from the archive should I do apt-get update
&& apt-get upgrade followed by apt-get dist-upgrade? Will it grab from
the newly built packages? Will it bork the newly installed system?
Rod
On 11/16/2016 2:12 PM, rod wrote:
> Than
ng is this:
>>
>> root@mw-monitor:/home/rod# aptitude
>> Ouch! Got SIGSEGV, dying..
>> Segmentation fault
>>
>> or
>>
>> root@mw-monitor:/home/rod# apt-get install gunzip
>> Reading package lists... Done
>> Building dependency tree
>> Re
ng is this:
>>
>> root@mw-monitor:/home/rod# aptitude
>> Ouch! Got SIGSEGV, dying..
>> Segmentation fault
>>
>> or
>>
>> root@mw-monitor:/home/rod# apt-get install gunzip
>> Reading package lists... Done
>> Building dependency tree
>> Re
gt;
> root@mw-monitor:/home/rod# aptitude
> Ouch! Got SIGSEGV, dying..
> Segmentation fault
>
> or
>
> root@mw-monitor:/home/rod# apt-get install gunzip
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree
> Reading state information... Done
> ESegmentation fau
ault
or
root@mw-monitor:/home/rod# apt-get install gunzip
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
ESegmentation fault
with this on the console:
[ 1656.976655] apt-get[545]: segfault at fff200794008 ip
fff100015994 (rpc fff10001
about that without blocking a transition…
(Michael will upload that soon together with a few more fixes.
As of writing this should make apt new-serious-bug-free… yeah!
We will see how long this will last… :) )
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
apt-669061-unaligned-http-buffer-sigbus-on-sparc.diff
Description: Binary data
On 04/18/2012 06:07 PM, David Kalnischkies wrote:
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 00:22, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
I guess you're not a DD, and so don't have access to the porter
machines?
Correct guess, but I am adventures enough to work around it:
I had a lot of fun today trying to compile apt=
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 00:22, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> I guess you're not a DD, and so don't have access to the porter
> machines?
Correct guess, but I am adventures enough to work around it:
I had a lot of fun today trying to compile apt=0.9.1 in a qemu-sparc
debian etch image
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:04:34PM +0100, pe...@kahn.nu wrote:
> Hi and thanks for all your hard work.
> I have just tried updating my debian hurd install and dpkg fails with the
> following error:
>
> dpkg: error processing
> /var/cache/apt/archives/sysvinit_2.88dsf-16_hurd-
Hi and thanks for all your hard work.
I have just tried updating my debian hurd install and dpkg fails with the
following error:
dpkg: error processing
/var/cache/apt/archives/sysvinit_2.88dsf-16_hurd-i386.deb (--unpack):
trying to overwrite '/sbin/halt', which is also in package hurd
;t).
This patch fixes the bug:
--- apt-pkg/contrib/sha1.cc~2011-06-17 03:10:20.0 -0700
+++ apt-pkg/contrib/sha1.cc 2011-07-25 15:16:26.774548017 -0700
@@ -74,10 +74,9 @@ static void SHA1Transform(uint32_t state
uint32_t l[16];
}
CHAR64LONG16;
- CHAR64LONG16 *blo
Le 21/07/2011 13:52, David Kalnischkies a écrit :
package apt
severity 634696 serious
merge 634696 634925
thanks
Hello all,
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 15:44, Sébastien Bernard wrote:
root# apt-get update
Get:1 http://ftp.de.debian.org sid InRelease [146 kB]
E: Method http has died unexpectedly
package apt
severity 634696 serious
merge 634696 634925
thanks
Hello all,
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 15:44, Sébastien Bernard wrote:
> root# apt-get update
> Get:1 http://ftp.de.debian.org sid InRelease [146 kB]
> E: Method http has died unexpectedly!
> E: Sub-process http receiv
On 19 Jan 2009, at 23:50, Martin wrote:
IIRC this is because some of the repository signing keys have expired.
If you check back throught the archives you will find a load of posts
about this from when it first became a problem. The answer is to
I couldn't remember the error message off-hand,
On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 22:16 +, gavin duley wrote:
> On 17 Jan 2009, at 22:37, Chris Andrew wrote:
>
> > Hi, all.
> >
> > I'm trying to do a dist-upgrade from sarge to etch on my SS20. Sadly,
> > I am getting a gpg error when apt and other apt utilities try
On 17 Jan 2009, at 22:37, Chris Andrew wrote:
Hi, all.
I'm trying to do a dist-upgrade from sarge to etch on my SS20. Sadly,
I am getting a gpg error when apt and other apt utilities try to
configure. Does anyone know how I can overcome this?
I'm not a Debian developer, but:
Hi, all.
I'm trying to do a dist-upgrade from sarge to etch on my SS20. Sadly,
I am getting a gpg error when apt and other apt utilities try to
configure. Does anyone know how I can overcome this?
Installing something may be a problem, so it would be better if I
could apt-get and forc
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 02:31:29PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
>
> 2.6.22 is in lenny though, so either your mirror is outdated or you have
> no 'sid' sources in sources.list?
Yeah, I've managed to somehow convince myself that lenny == sid, so
could not find a problem for a while. After putting
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 23:31:16 +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've noticed something strange: even though the newer versions of the
> kernel (like linux-image-2.6.24) for sparc have been uploaded to the
> archive [0], they are not showing up in 'apt-ca
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 11:31:16PM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've noticed something strange: even though the newer versions of the
> kernel (like linux-image-2.6.24) for sparc have been uploaded to the
> archive [0], they are not showing up in 'apt-ca
Hi,
I've noticed something strange: even though the newer versions of the
kernel (like linux-image-2.6.24) for sparc have been uploaded to the
archive [0], they are not showing up in 'apt-cache search' and cannot be
installed using apt-get. The last kernel I see with 'apt-ca
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:39:08PM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> > reassign 465116 libdb4.6
I would not be shocked if this was the same issue as the test failure in
http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=db;ver=4.6.21-5;arch=sparc;stamp=1199489617
If anyone can provide (for use by Or
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 10:51:40PM +0100, Ulrich Teichert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> >Unfortunately this didn't solve my problem. I tried many difference
> >options from the apt man pages, but kept getting a libc6 (I think)
> >error. This is provided by apt, which c
Hi,
>Unfortunately this didn't solve my problem. I tried many difference
>options from the apt man pages, but kept getting a libc6 (I think)
>error. This is provided by apt, which can't be upgraded. I couldn't
>install a 2.6 kernel without this.
Be happy. My
Unfortunately this didn't solve my problem. I tried many difference
options from the apt man pages, but kept getting a libc6 (I think)
error. This is provided by apt, which can't be upgraded. I couldn't
install a 2.6 kernel without this.
My uname shows that i'm running E
That could be worth a try. Even with Etch being the end of 32-bit
support, this could be a lifesaver.
Thanks,
Chris.
On 28/10/2007, Ulrich Teichert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> sorry for the noise, but if another user runs into this:
>
> [del]
> >S
Hi,
sorry for the noise, but if another user runs into this:
[del]
>Setting up apt (0.6.46.4-0.1) ...
>gpg: key 2D230C5F: no valid user IDs
>gpg: this may be caused by a missing self-signature
>gpg: key 6070D3A1: no valid user IDs
>gpg: this may be caused by a missing self-sign
Hi,
I've had exactly the same problem. The only way I could get my
SparcStation20 to have installed Debian, without any problems like
this one, was to do a Sarge install and keep the /etc/apt/sources.list
referring to the CD only. The machine works brilliantly, but does not
get any up
Hi,
I'm having a problem with apt during a dist-upgrade from sarge to etch
on a sparc32 machine (still running a 2.4 kernel - but stock 2.6.23.1
does boot on this box, so after the upgrade I will try to get this running).
I had some dpkg-processes being stuck in non-interruptible sleep an
I can't get the /etc/apt/sources.list at the moment, but the file was
generated using option 1 in dselect (repo set-up). Can anyway post a good
sources.list for sparc (32)?
Thanks,
Chris.
On 23/07/07, Julien Cristau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 00:22:52 +
h the following packages:
>
> apt
> apt-utils
> aptitude
>
> The problem I have with all three is that I get an error message that says
> "a public key is not available", therefore the packages can't be
> identified.
That should not happen with official packages
Ludovic,
Thank you for your reply. As mentioned, I did a dist-upgrade from Sarge. I
can confirm that I am now running Debian 4.0 (Etch). Unfortunately, when I
try to check for updates, I have problems with the following packages:
apt
apt-utils
aptitude
The problem I have with all three is
Hi,
"Chris Andrew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there anybody around that is successfully using Etch or Lenny on a
> sparcstation20? I have
> upgraded from Sarge to Etch, and I am getting all sorts of bad errors when I
> try to use dselect
> or apt-get.
Ca
Hi,
Is there anybody around that is successfully using Etch or Lenny on a
sparcstation20? I have upgraded from Sarge to Etch, and I am getting all
sorts of bad errors when I try to use dselect or apt-get.
If so, please can you post your /etc/apt/sources.list.
BTW, if there is more than one
t; > > > Is the SS20 32bit?
> > > >
> > > > On 22/07/07, Chris Andrew <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > > It looks like option 1 of dselect has replaced apt-setup.
> > > > >
> > > > > I used this to create a sources f
; > On 22/07/07, Chris Andrew <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > It looks like option 1 of dselect has replaced apt-setup.
> > >
> > > I used this to create a sources file, using the default US repos.
> > >
> > > I still get authentication errors.
>
gt; > > Cos is anybody maintaining the 32bit repositories?
> > > >
> > > > On 22/07/07, andrew holway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > Is the SS20 32bit?
> > > > >
> > > > > On 22/07/07, Chris Andrew <[EMA
Cos is anybody maintaining the 32bit repositories?
On 22/07/07, andrew holway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is the SS20 32bit?
On 22/07/07, Chris Andrew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It looks like option 1 of dselect has replaced apt-setup.
>
> I used this to create a so
s anybody maintaining the 32bit repositories?
> >
> > On 22/07/07, andrew holway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Is the SS20 32bit?
> > >
> > > On 22/07/07, Chris Andrew <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > It looks like option 1 of dsele
Is the SS20 32bit?
On 22/07/07, Chris Andrew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It looks like option 1 of dselect has replaced apt-setup.
I used this to create a sources file, using the default US repos.
I still get authentication errors.
Something is not right.
Chris.
On 22/07/07, Chris
t; On 22/07/07, Chris Andrew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It looks like option 1 of dselect has replaced apt-setup.
> >
> > I used this to create a sources file, using the default US repos.
> >
> > I still get authentication errors.
> >
> > Somethi
It looks like option 1 of dselect has replaced apt-setup.
I used this to create a sources file, using the default US repos.
I still get authentication errors.
Something is not right.
Chris.
On 22/07/07, Chris Andrew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andrew,
I got more error messages th
make your /etc/apt/sources.list contain the following
deb http://ftp.freenet.de/debian etch main contrib non-free
deb http://security.debian.org etch/updates main contrib non-free
Then try apt-get update again.
On 22/07/07, Chris Andrew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is stopping m
install package debian-archive-keyring
Cheers,
Andy
moonet.co.uk
On 22/07/07, Chris Andrew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I've got Etch running on an SS20 (as previously mentioned). I'm trying to
update my system, but get signature related problems with the APT packages.
ap
This is stopping me from installing apt/ apt-utils and aptitude. I feel
this could be problematic.
On 22/07/07, Chris Andrew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hmmm, says it is already the newest version.
On 22/07/07, andrew holway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> install pack
ly mentioned). I'm trying
to
> update my system, but get signature related problems with the APT
packages.
>
> apt-key list tells me that two signatures have expired. Anyone know how
to
> fix this?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris.
>
Hi,
I've got Etch running on an SS20 (as previously mentioned). I'm trying to
update my system, but get signature related problems with the APT packages.
apt-key list tells me that two signatures have expired. Anyone know how to
fix this?
Cheers,
Chris.
Hi,
I start testing daily build of netboot install and want economize usage
of my Internet line but installation doesn't work. I mean that problem
is in installation script that use wget and not apt ( because apt is not
still installed). My result is that apt-cacher or apt-proxy is not
u
Building master device...Task
failed/opt/sybase/ASE-12_5/bin/dataserver:relocation
error:/opt/sybase/ASE-12_5/bin/dataserver:undefined
symbol:__vt_9bad_allocServer 'RETOP' was not
created.
Building master device...Task
failed/opt/sybase/ASE-12_5/bin/dataserver:relocation
error:/opt/sybase/ASE-12_5/bin/dataserver:undefined
symbol:__vt_9bad_allocServer 'RETOP' was not
created.
update. The updates you are seeing are just minor tweaks
in the packaging of the kernel.
> By the way, shouldn't apt be holding back the linux-image packages?
No, why?
If you don't want to upgrade your kernel at that time (probably because
you don't want to reboot), just answe
Feel free to ignore this. I just found out why I had this problem:
bugs:~# apt-cache policy linux-image-2.6.12-1-sparc64
linux-image-2.6.12-1-sparc64:
Installed: 2.6.12-6
Candidate: 2.6.12-10
Version Table:
2.6.12-10 0
800 http://ftp.de.debian.org testing/main Packages
I have linux-image 2.6.12 and apt-get trys to install it again:
bugs:~# apt-get upgrade
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
The following packages have been kept back:
gconf2 libgconf2-4
The following packages will be upgraded:
autoconf base-config cpio gnome
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 12:25:44PM +0100, Martin wrote:
>> since I haven't experienced a crossing over from a "testing" to a "stable"
>> distribution: is it now the time to change the entries in
>> /etc/apt/sources.list from "testing" to &
> since I haven't experienced a crossing over from a "testing" to a "stable"
> distribution: is it now the time to change the entries in
> /etc/apt/sources.list from "testing" to "stable", as I do not plan to further
> proceed from
On 06/17/05 07:31:31AM +0200, Jurzitza, Dieter wrote:
> Hi folks,
> since I haven't experienced a crossing over from a "testing" to a "stable"
> distribution: is it now the time to change the entries in
> /etc/apt/sources.list from "testing" to &
Hi folks,
since I haven't experienced a crossing over from a "testing" to a "stable"
distribution: is it now the time to change the entries in /etc/apt/sources.list
from "testing" to "stable", as I do not plan to further proceed from sarge to
worked for me too, thanks!!!
-bela
A forced installed did the trick.
dpkg -i --force-all
/var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-sparc64_2.2.5-11.8_sparc.deb
--
~
-greg
"hrmmm - a Beowulf cluster of Dreamcasts and PS2s..."
-Slashdot.org post
On Thu, Jan 20, 200
A forced installed did the trick.
dpkg -i --force-all /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-sparc64_2.2.5-11.8_sparc.deb
--
~
-greg
"hrmmm - a Be
> Earlier I tried to 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade' my system (an
> Ultra2 running 2.4.18 SMP) and I get an error pertaining to the newer
> version of libc6 and gcc-3.0 (error listed below). I think someone
> else mentioned this problem earlier, but could
Hello,
Earlier I tried to 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade' my system (an
Ultra2 running 2.4.18 SMP) and I get an error pertaining to the newer
version of libc6 and gcc-3.0 (error listed below). I think someone
else mentioned this problem earlier, but couldn't find if a
-->"Heitzso" == Heitzso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Heitzso> apt-get update followed by apt-get upgrade or apt-get
Heitzso> dist-upgrade has been snarling for a couple of days on
Heitzso> python
i struck what sounds like this on x86 also.
some messing aroung
> apt-get update
> followed by
> apt-get upgrade
> or
> apt-get dist-upgrade
> has been snarling for a couple of days on python
>
> I don't know if this is related to the debian servers being
> compromised.
>
> Clues appreciated re what's going on
apt-get update
followed by
apt-get upgrade
or
apt-get dist-upgrade
has been snarling for a couple of days on python
I don't know if this is related to the debian servers being
compromised.
Clues appreciated re what's going on. I'm not able
to search the debian mail archives at t
Heitzso wrote:
Current debian unstable ssl (libssl and openssl) is 0.9.7c-5
Could you upgrade using 'apt-build install libssl0.9.7'
and let me know what happens? I assume
'apt-build install openssl' is equivalent in that both
work against the same source files and build s
Current debian unstable ssl (libssl and openssl) is 0.9.7c-5
Could you upgrade using 'apt-build install libssl0.9.7'
and let me know what happens? I assume
'apt-build install openssl' is equivalent in that both
work against the same source files and build setup.
Thanks.
And
Heitzso wrote:
Problem is current libssl package doesn't build in sparc32
environment. There's a bug in the package build setup.
BTW, lsh was recommended and it works wonders. Slightly
less than 2 seconds to setup ssh/cvs-over-ssh, which is
remarkably better than the 10 or so seconds for sett
Heitzso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Problem is current libssl package doesn't build in sparc32
> environment. There's a bug in the package build setup.
Why do you need to build it rather than just installing the package
from unstable?
You do need either to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH or to link /usr/
od
in some cases.
http://www.yhbt.net/normalperson/debian/html/benchmark.html
apt-fu and my modified pentium-builder available here:
http://www.yhbt.net/normalperson/debian/
Can your tools work in a debian-sparc environment?
And how do your tools differ from the apt-build
tools (bot
1 - 100 of 240 matches
Mail list logo
