I'm running Woody right now, but am tempted to dselect-upgrade KDE to the
3.10 in unstable (because of the improvements to kmail). Any thoughts
on the potential pain/painlessness of this upgrade, before I try it? If
there's a fair chance of having to spend a lot of time fixing a broken
system
On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 05:20:44PM -0500, Levi Waldron wrote:
> I'm running Woody right now, but am tempted to dselect-upgrade KDE to the
> 3.10 in unstable (because of the improvements to kmail). Any thoughts
> on the potential pain/painlessness of this upgrade, before I try it? If
> there's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 05:20:44PM -0500, Levi Waldron wrote:
> I'm running Woody right now, but am tempted to dselect-upgrade KDE to the
> 3.10 in unstable (because of the improvements to kmail). Any thoughts
> on the potential pain/painlessness of
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 12:48:55AM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 05:20:44PM -0500, Levi Waldron wrote:
> > I'm running Woody right now, but am tempted to dselect-upgrade KDE
> > to the 3.10 in unstable (because of the improvements to kmail). Any
> > thoughts on the potential
On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 05:20:44PM -0500, Levi Waldron wrote:
> I'm running Woody right now, but am tempted to dselect-upgrade KDE to the
> 3.10 in unstable (because of the improvements to kmail). Any thoughts
> on the potential pain/painlessness of this upgrade, before I try it? If
> there's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 02 April 2003 16:48, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 05:20:44PM -0500, Levi Waldron wrote:
> > I'm running Woody right now, but am tempted to dselect-upgrade KDE to
> > the 3.10 in unstable (because of the improvements to kma
Paul Johnson wrote:
> I think it's linked to a newer libc than is in woody. Upgrading KDE
> would result in upgrading libc, which results in upgrading...hmm,
> could someone tell me what isn't dependant on libc again?
First off you need to have graphviz from unstable, backported is fine
and works
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 05:31:23PM +0800, Arne Goetje wrote:
> The libc is not that problem. The major problem is, that kmail in sid is
> unusable in the moment.
Really? I'm pretty sure that was recently fixed. I just checked,
kmail runs on my box
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 03:12:32AM -0600, Rob VanFleet wrote:
> That being said, you'll probably run into a few false starts during the
> dist-upgrade - few conflicting packages that need to be tweaked manually
> or temporarily removed with dpkg (some
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 02 April 2003 18:32, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 05:31:23PM +0800, Arne Goetje wrote:
> > The libc is not that problem. The major problem is, that kmail in sid
> > is unusable in the moment.
>
> Really? I'm pretty sure t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 07:06:58PM +0800, Arne Goetje wrote:
> when did you upgrade? I tried it on saturday with the deb from
> ftp.debian.org. 3.1.1-1 AFAIK...
That's the version installed here...4:3.1.1-1...
- --
.''`. Baloo Ursidae <[EMAIL
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 02:37:03 -0800
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd also go re-read the long "The Myth of Apt Pinning" thread that ran
> a while back. One of the DDs speaks out against pinning, essentially
> considering it harmful. Consider yourself warned if you *really* want
> to r
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 09:14:26AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Was that on this list or another.
I'm pretty sure it was. I remember having to use thread-delete on it
after I got tired of it...I recall it being a rather long thread.
- --
.''`
Levi,
I've been using it for 2 weeks now without any issues whatsoever.
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Levi Waldron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 4:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: upgrading to unstable KDE
I'm running Woody right now, but am
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 02:37:03 -0800
> Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I'd also go re-read the long "The Myth of Apt Pinning" thread that ran
>> a while back. One of the DDs speaks out against pinning, essentially
>> considering it harmful. Consider yourself
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Any thought of using the KDE3.1 for woody from KDE?
apt-get sources.list line:
deb http://download.us.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/latest/Debian/ woody main
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+i3fPajFD3wrWXs8RAvWVAJ4ykD
On April 2, 2003 03:33 am, Paul Johnson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 07:06:58PM +0800, Arne Goetje wrote:
> > when did you upgrade? I tried it on saturday with the deb from
> > ftp.debian.org. 3.1.1-1 AFAIK...
>
> That's the version installed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 08:49:37AM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200301/msg01644.html
That's the one. I remember it spilling over into debian-user, though
oddly enough it doesn't show that in the
Great, thanks.
I read the thread.
Kevin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 03 April 2003 11:47, Leo Spalteholz wrote:
> On April 2, 2003 03:33 am, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 07:06:58PM +0800, Arne Goetje wrote:
> > > when did you upgrad
On April 1, 2003 06:11 pm, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> You'll probably have much better luck using the unofficial native woody
> packages of KDE 3.1. See http://www.apt-get.org/, which will refer you
> to:
> deb http://download.us.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/latest/Debian/ woody main
Thanks everyone for t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 11:17:28PM +0800, Arne Goetje wrote:
> Ok, now it works. I upgraded all dependency packages for kmail to the latest
> versions, although kmail doesn't 'require' it. I don't know which one of
> them did the trick, but now it wo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Are you using apt pinning? If so, this is a prime example of why the
> developers tell you *not* to do this unless you have a fairly firm
> understanding of what's going on and are willing to track at least the
> announcements for all versions invol
23 matches
Mail list logo
