On Sun, 17 Nov 1996 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One solution would be to hade an unhold feature, which sets the status
according to the currently-installed status.
I don't understand this. The 'default' behavior of dpkg-ftp is to _ask_
the user if they want to get all of the new/updated
On Thu, 14 Nov 1996, Marco Mariani wrote:
The installation procedure is *very* important, because a new Debian user
should instantly get the feeling he's done the Right Thing :-)
Has anyone given any thought to writing a very simple, separate
installer for debian? It could contain a very
My only complaint is that it autoinstalls updated packages. There have
been a number of times that I wanted to grab one new package via ftp
install, and came up with 10 megs of updated packages.
Here, here...I second this. I know you can confirm what to get but
maybe there
Brian K Servis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Paul Christenson writes:
On Wed, 13 Nov 1996, Mark Carroll wrote:
My only complaint is that it autoinstalls updated packages. There have
been a number of times that I wanted to grab one new package via ftp
install, and came up with 10 megs of
On 15 Nov 1996, Andy Guy wrote:
Brian K Servis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Paul Christenson writes:
On Wed, 13 Nov 1996, Mark Carroll wrote:
My only complaint is that it autoinstalls updated packages. There have
been a number of times that I wanted to grab one new package via
I think there are definitely two threads that should be pulled out of here:
1) Hints and tips on using dselect
2) Improvements for dselect
Personally I had few problems getting to grips with dselect, but as far as
intuitive, user friendly interfaces are concerned its a pigs orphan.
I know that
The way I read the dselect discussion my feelings are that most people
are happy with what dselect does (even if they don't know it, cf.
standard machine configs), but are perhaps not too enamoured of the
programme's interface...
Simon == Simon Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon and a
Paul Christenson writes:
On Wed, 13 Nov 1996, Mark Carroll wrote:
My only complaint is that it autoinstalls updated packages. There have
been a number of times that I wanted to grab one new package via ftp
install, and came up with 10 megs of updated packages. (Not bad at work,
but can be
On Wed, 13 Nov 1996, Mark Carroll wrote:
It is like emacs to the novice. (cryptic, non-standard interface, funny
keyboard accel keys, no menues...)
Hmmm - I got on well with dselect from the beginning, without reading any
documentation about it, and I find it a convenient, useful tool.
Another nickel's worth on dselect...
When getting packages via ftp, some sort of progress indicator would be
nice, especially for those with slow, not-too-reliable links.
| This is OFFICIAL *WRITTEN* notification that I want to be *REMOVED* |
| from *ALL* of your mailing lists. *EVERY*
On Tue, 12 Nov 1996, Kevin K. Lewis wrote:
A la GLINT, I suppose, though I've never seen it. I think it would be
fun to work on something like this. Maybe Debian could just use GLINT
and massage the backend (and add stuff for the additional Debian
package features).
Can GLINT be used
On Wed, 13 Nov 1996, Martin Konold wrote:
I would like to be able to install packages on stand alone systems
without X11
I second that! I'd prefer it the way 'dselect' already is working on the
console and in an xterm under X11. A GUI oriented installation tool is a
waste of CPU time, memory,
On Wed, 13 Nov 1996, Paul Seelig wrote:
On Wed, 13 Nov 1996, Martin Konold wrote:
I would like to be able to install packages on stand alone systems
without X11
I second that! I'd prefer it the way 'dselect' already is working on the
console and in an xterm under X11. A GUI oriented
I would prefer a much improved dselect.
Todays dselect is not convinient to be used.
It is like emacs to the novice. (cryptic, non-standard interface, funny
keyboard accel keys, no menues...)
Hmmm - I got on well with dselect from the beginning, without reading any
documentation about it, and
I would prefer a much improved dselect.
Todays dselect is not convinient to be used.
It is like emacs to the novice. (cryptic, non-standard interface, funny
keyboard accel keys, no menues...)
Hmmm - I got on well with dselect from the beginning, without reading any
documentation about it,
On Wed, 13 Nov 1996, Mark Carroll wrote:
I would prefer a much improved dselect. Todays dselect is not
convinient to be used. It is like emacs to the novice. (cryptic,
non-standard interface, funny keyboard accel keys, no menues...)
Hmmm - I got on well with dselect from the beginning,
Just curious: Are there still advantages to the Debian package
management system over the RPM system?
I originally went with Debian because of the better package system
(and because I like the idea of Debian). I know someone that is
thinking of getting Redhat 4.0. I told him my reason for
Just curious: Are there still advantages to the Debian package
management system over the RPM system?
I originally went with Debian because of the better package system
(and because I like the idea of Debian). I know someone that is
thinking of getting Redhat 4.0. I told him my reason for
On Tue, 12 Nov 1996, Mark Carroll wrote:
Hmmm - isn't it true that there's work at the moment towards giving Debian
the ability to use RedHat packages?
And what about the rumour that both packaging systems are going to be
merged in a common one sometime in the future? I've sporadically read
Excerpts from mail: 12-Nov-96 Is `.deb' still better than.. by Kevin K.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just curious: Are there still advantages to the Debian package
management system over the RPM system?
If I understand this correctly, RedHat put it's RPM software under a non-GPL
copyright, and source is
Rafael Kitover writes:
Excerpts from mail: 12-Nov-96 Is `.deb' still better than.. by Kevin K.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just curious: Are there still advantages to the Debian package
management system over the RPM system?
If I understand this correctly, RedHat put it's RPM software under
From: Mark Carroll [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just curious: Are there still advantages to the Debian package
management system over the RPM system?
Several. We support pre-dependencies, which make upgrades a good deal
more foolproof, as well as regular dependencies. Debian packages are
easier to build
From: Paul Seelig [EMAIL PROTECTED]
And what about the rumour that both packaging systems are going to be
merged in a common one sometime in the future?
Now that we have a Red Hat to Debian package converter, we can mark
that task done. I think that both Red Hat and Debian are working on
making
Thanks to all those who responded (I posted the original question).
Bruce Perens writes:
[...]
Several. We support pre-dependencies, which make upgrades a good deal
more foolproof, as well as regular dependencies. Debian packages are
easier to build (especially now with debmake, it's
24 matches
Mail list logo
