I don't see a 1.0.4 info file on my system at all, so I'm not surprised
you can't install it. I show 1.0.3-5 as the latest stable version,
1.0.3-2 as an alternate, and 1.0.5-4 as the unstable version. The deb
file you removed may have been introducing problems, so it may have been
for the best.
Thinking that I knew what I was doing I removed the gnome-vfs and gnome-vfs-shlibs
.deb files, assuming that I could just rebuild them. I got the tarball (fink fetch)
for gnome-vfs and tried to build it (fink build). There was a 1.0.4-2 version in
/sw/fink/debs and in /sw/fink/dists/unstable/
Enrico Franconi wrote:
> On June 4, Warren Pollans writes:
>
>>wait a minute! /bin/sh and /bin/zsh seem to be the same file ???
>
>
> Aaargh! How comes? That's true for me as well:
>
>
>>ls -al /bin/sh /bin/zsh
>
> -r-xr-xr-x1 root wheel 449616 Dec 26 04:10 /bin/sh*
> -rwxr-x
> From: Jean-François Mertens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue Jun 04, 2002 09:11:03 Europe/Brussels
> To: Warren Pollans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tuesday, June 4, 2002, at 05:05 , Warren Pollans wrote:
>
>> wait a minute! /bin/sh and /bin/zsh seem to be the same file ???
>
> They ARE differe
On June 4, Warren Pollans writes:
> wait a minute! /bin/sh and /bin/zsh seem to be the same file ???
Aaargh! How comes? That's true for me as well:
> ls -al /bin/sh /bin/zsh
-r-xr-xr-x1 root wheel 449616 Dec 26 04:10 /bin/sh*
-rwxr-xr-x1 root wheel 449616 Dec 26 04:1
wait a minute! /bin/sh and /bin/zsh seem to be the same file ???
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002 20:47:43 +0200
Jean-François Mertens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, June 4, 2002, at 08:40 , Chris Zubrzycki wrote:
> > Its not *your* shell that maters, it's /bin/sh. was that ever touched?
>
>
Odd. That's usually worked for me. Try this:
1) remove gnome-vfs-shlibs (by force)
2) go to the directory where your gnome-vfs* debs are and do a 'sudo dpkg
-i --force-depends gnome-vfs' to install gnome-vfs.
3) Then do a 'sudo dpkg -i --force-overwrite gnome-vfs-shlibs' to
overwrite the file t
Not as far as I know. The date on /bin/sh is Dec 8 - I've only had this box (14"ibook
- 10.1.4) since April - new from apple
warren% sum /bin/sh
37165 440 /bin/sh
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002 14:40:20 -0400
Chris Zubrzycki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 4, 2002, at 10:37 AM, Warren Polla
On Tuesday, June 4, 2002, at 08:40 , Chris Zubrzycki wrote:
> Its not *your* shell that maters, it's /bin/sh. was that ever touched?
Right ! Mine IS zsh ..
JF Mertens
___
Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Confer
On Tuesday, June 4, 2002, at 08:28 , Alexander Hansen wrote:
> I have the same (0.0.0) lib, and I'm using tcsh.
You're right...
In addition, I get for both libgnomevfs.0.0.0.dylib and
libgnomevfs-2.0.0.0.dylib
"compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 1.0.0"
???
JF Mertens
On Tuesday, June 4, 2002, at 10:37 AM, Warren Pollans wrote:
No, I'm using the "default" /bin/tcsh
Its not *your* shell that maters, it's /bin/sh. was that ever touched?
-chris zubrzycki
- --
PGP public key: http://homepage.mac.com/beren/publickey.txt
ID: 0xA2ABC070
Fingerprint: 26B0 BA6B A409 FA
I'm using tcsh
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002 20:24:16 +0200
Jean-François Mertens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Somebody seems to forget to reply to the list...
>
> There is another, more serious problem:
> observe the 0.0.0 in the "/sw/lib/libgnomevfs.0.0.0.dylib"
> Are you using bash ?
>
> JF Mertens
>
No, I'm using the "default" /bin/tcsh
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002 20:24:16 +0200
Jean-François Mertens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Somebody seems to forget to reply to the list...
>
> There is another, more serious problem:
> observe the 0.0.0 in the "/sw/lib/libgnomevfs.0.0.0.dylib"
> Are you using ba
I have the same (0.0.0) lib, and I'm using tcsh.
--
Alexander K. Hansen
Associate Research Scientist, Columbia University
Levitated Dipole Experiment
MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center, 175 Albany Street, NW17-219
Cambridge, MA 02139-4213
Phone: 617-252-1818Fax:208-988-4057
On Tue, 4
I get almost-the-same error. Now it thinks that '/sw/lib/libgnomevfs.0.0.0.dylib',
which is also in package gnome-vfs-shlibs" whereas before it thought was also in
gnome-vfs
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002 14:06:01 -0400 (EDT)
Alexander Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm. How about trying the forc
Somebody seems to forget to reply to the list...
There is another, more serious problem:
observe the 0.0.0 in the "/sw/lib/libgnomevfs.0.0.0.dylib"
Are you using bash ?
JF Mertens
___
Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Develo
Hmm. How about trying the forced removal again, and installing
gnome-vfs-shlibs first?
--
Alexander K. Hansen
Associate Research Scientist, Columbia University
Levitated Dipole Experiment
MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center, 175 Albany Street, NW17-219
Cambridge, MA 02139-4213
Phone: 617-252-1
Thanks,
I was able to:
dpkg -r --force-depends gnome-vfs
fink install gnome-vfs (There were warnings that /sw/etc/vfs and
/sw/etc/vfs/modules were not empty.)
"fink install gnome-vfs-shlibs" produces the following error:
"trying to overwrite '/sw/lib/libgnomevfs.0.0.0
I've had this before on other packages, usually when the package first
becomes a splitoff one--the gnome-vfs-shlibs package has a file that was
originally in the gnome-vfs package, but isn't anymore. One option is to
do a 'dpkg -r --force-depends gnome-vfs' to remove your old gnome-vfs
completely
What is this complain about? The complaint/error-msg is at the end of
this note. It is the error with which "sudo fink update-all" ended.
I have run "sudo fink selfupdate-cvs" . My fink.conf Trees lines is:
Trees: local/main stable/main stable/crypto local/bootstrap
Help Please
Thanks,
20 matches
Mail list logo
