So much for the topic at hand... in general: fear not.
It's part of the Linux learning process that one learns where to pick up
information. man, info, /usr/share/doc/, www... google is your friend,
but google is not the be-all and end-all of everything.
Especially if you what you're looking
On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 12:14, Joe Rhett wrote:
So much for the topic at hand... in general: fear not.
It's part of the Linux learning process that one learns where to pick up
information. man, info, /usr/share/doc/, www... google is your friend,
but google is not the be-all and end-all of
Since this post has no technical merits, I separated it out.
I've been using Linux since 0.7x kernels, so you can skip the patronizing.
Last time I checked, some of my patches were still in the driver sources
for various adapters.
Though I must say I'm extremely curious how you managed to
The point I was making is that most of us have better things to do than
search more than 5 pages of google hits. If the 'right places' to get
Debian applications were listed on the debian homepages, this wouldn't be
necessary. (more on this below)
All of the right places already ARE
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 14:24:25 -0800,
Joe Rhett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The point I was making is that most of us have better things to do
than search more than 5 pages of google hits. If the 'right
places' to get Debian applications were listed on the
Please, stop complaining, and do your research
Actually, your comments here are demonstrating just how inadequate the
apt-get documentation is. Because I read through it a dozen times -- and
was already making notes to suggest cleaning it up -- and I never saw
anything about the 'policy'
Kernel updates go in pretty quickly, as a rule. wireless-tools is up to
date in testing, and linux-wlan-ng is only a fraction behind unstable.
Why isn't it showing me these?
Kernel package names change, therefore package management tools don't
upgrade them automatically, which is
On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 03:56, Joe Rhett wrote:
Use a real package manager (not apt-get) which shows you new packages.
The really funny thing about this whole topic is that we've now come full
circle. Read the subject line.
Well, apt-get simply is no package manager. At least not in the
Try adding this line to your /etc/apt/apt.conf file and see if you get
better results with your 'apt-get update':
APT::Default-Release testing;
That's unnecessary if you only have one release listed in
/etc/apt/sources.list (which is the configuration I'd strongly
recommend) and may
You seem to have a fairly big misconception here: Adding testing to the
sources.list and doing an apt-get update and upgrade will _not_ reflect
how many packages are in testing. Not by any stretch.
First off, apt-get upgrade and apt-get dist-upgrade are very different:
upgrade will install
Ah, that would explain your confusion. 'apt-get upgrade' isn't what you
want, since as documented in the apt-get(8) man page it will not install
new packages. In particular, if you attempt to use 'apt-get upgrade' to
upgrade from stable to testing, it will refuse to upgrade libc6 because
of
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 11:46:30AM -0800, Joe Rhett wrote:
HOWEVER, both of these commands are starting from the goal of upgrading
to newer versions of packages you _already_ have installed. It gives
you no idea what _else_ might be included in sarge.
That's exactly what I want.
Can
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 11:53:12AM -0800, Joe Rhett wrote:
Colin Watson wrote:
Ah, that would explain your confusion. 'apt-get upgrade' isn't what you
want, since as documented in the apt-get(8) man page it will not install
new packages. In particular, if you attempt to use 'apt-get
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 11:19:47AM -0800, Joe Rhett wrote:
Colin Watson wrote:
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 04:41:50PM -0600, DePriest, Jason R. wrote:
Try adding this line to your /etc/apt/apt.conf file and see if you get
better results with your 'apt-get update':
APT::Default-Release
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 04:41:50PM -0600, DePriest, Jason R. wrote:
From: Joe Rhett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Let me rephrase. Either the US mirrors are screwed, or there is
less than a dozen packages in testing. Because adding testing to
the sources list and doing an apt-get update
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 00:47:54 +
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I actually use Debian testing as a desktop, eight hours a day, five days
a week. It works great.
Moi aussi.
But there are some kde-related packages that just won't install - e.g.
quanta, which I wanted to have a look at.
--- Joe Rhett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Okay, this
is probably a bonehead user question but
I'm just getting used
to Debian. Not normally a bonehead :-(
I would like/prefer to run 'stable'. Debian/Woody
installed on my laptop
perfectly fine. Wireless/WEP, IPsec, X all up and
running
Joe wrote:
So I am writing here in hopes I'm overlooking
something. Please, tell me
how one can update just one package and its
dependancies, without doing a
full-on conversion from Woody to unstable? If a
single package forces one
to upgrade completely to unstable branch, then
On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 02:35, Joe Rhett wrote:
--snip--
1. Set the unstable archives to a higher preference in /etc/apt/preferences
2. apt-get upgrade to update the entire lot?
... or am I missing a step?
That's about it. Simple really. :)
I find it kindof sad that testing really
On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 02:35, Joe Rhett wrote:
I find it kindof sad that testing really doesn't appear to have any
function any longer. One would like to run from testing and leave unstable
for the well, unstable stuff. But I haven't really found much in testing,
which means one must be
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 02:00:14AM -0800, Joe Rhett wrote:
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 03:23:48AM -0600, Alex Malinovich wrote:
Well, in my experience, testing is most useful immediately following a
new stable release, and least useful immediately preceding a new stable
release. If you were to
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 10:21:44 +
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's not true. KDE 3 went in just a few days ago (albeit somewhat
broken for now)
Indeed.
What would be really helpful would be if there was some easy-to-find
running guidance on what testing users should do - like
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 12:52:34PM +, Richard Kimber wrote:
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 10:21:44 +
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's not true. KDE 3 went in just a few days ago (albeit somewhat
broken for now)
Indeed.
What would be really helpful would be if there was some
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:35:20 +
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What would be really helpful would be if there was some easy-to-find
running guidance on what testing users should do - like don't do a
dist-upgrade just yet ... etc. Maybe there is such information - if
so I'd like
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 03:57:02PM +, Richard Kimber wrote:
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:35:20 +
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IRC channels are the best you're likely to do for running guidance. If
there's really serious hose-your-system breakage then somebody usually
posts to
If testing is what is supposed to be the next release, then it seems
pointless to even bother. Testing still has Mozilla 1.0. That's what,
2 years old?
We're working on it, but the mozilla package is buggy, which makes it
difficult to make the testing management scripts happy with it.
-Original Message-
From: Joe Rhett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 3:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Alex Malinovich
Subject: Re: What's the best package manager for
single-package upgrades?
Let me rephrase. Either the US mirrors are screwed
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 01:51:45PM -0800, Joe Rhett wrote:
If testing is what is supposed to be the next release, then it seems
pointless to even bother. Testing still has Mozilla 1.0. That's what,
2 years old?
We're working on it, but the mozilla package is buggy, which makes it
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 01:51:45PM -0800, Joe Rhett wrote:
Colin Watson wrote:
Joe Rhett wrote:
If testing is what is supposed to be the next release, then it seems
pointless to even bother. Testing still has Mozilla 1.0. That's what,
2 years old?
We're working on it, but the
29 matches
Mail list logo
