-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Friday 14 November 2003 12:47 pm, Margot wrote:
I was using urpmi the other night and received a message that I should
update my database.
I thought the command I used to use for this on 9.0 was 'updatedb', but
I tried all 3 ways (as user, su and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Friday 14 November 2003 12:47 pm, Margot wrote:
I was using urpmi the other night and received a message that I should
update my database.
I thought the command I used to use for this on 9.0 was 'updatedb', but
I tried all 3 ways (as user, su and
Charlie M. wrote:
Hi;
What's the address you're using, and for which mirror Margot? Some tree
structures are possibly changed due to the complete release of 9.2, and the
URL may have to be changed to reflect that. This happens because the mirrors
are a voluntary thing, and some only keep the
On Friday 14 Nov 2003 7:47 pm, Margot wrote:
I was using urpmi the other night and received a message that I should
update my database.
I thought the command I used to use for this on 9.0 was 'updatedb', but
I tried all 3 ways (as user, su and root) and got the response 'command
not found'.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Friday 14 November 2003 2:54 pm, Margot wrote:
snip
Being really stupid here (as usual!) but I can't find the command to
give the URLs for my sources. Tried
[EMAIL PROTECTED] margot]# urpmq --list-media
But only got this list of the names of the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Friday 14 November 2003 3:07 pm, Derek Jennings wrote:
On Friday 14 Nov 2003 7:47 pm, Margot wrote:
I was using urpmi the other night and received a message that I should
update my database.
I thought the command I used to use for this on 9.0
Derek Jennings wrote:
On Friday 14 Nov 2003 7:47 pm, Margot wrote:
I was using urpmi the other night and received a message that I should
update my database.
I thought the command I used to use for this on 9.0 was 'updatedb', but
I tried all 3 ways (as user, su and root) and got the response
On Friday 14 Nov 2003 10:52 pm, Margot wrote:
Still puzzled though - even though 'updatedb' was the wrong command for
what I wanted to do, as it is a valid command, why didn't it run? Even
though it would not have done what I wanted, surely it should have done
*something*?
Margot
It is
Derek Jennings wrote:
On Friday 14 Nov 2003 10:52 pm, Margot wrote:
Still puzzled though - even though 'updatedb' was the wrong command for
what I wanted to do, as it is a valid command, why didn't it run? Even
though it would not have done what I wanted, surely it should have done
*something*?