We have "SLE-11-SP2", "SLE_11" and "SLE_11_SP3".
By definition, a package built against SLE_11 will work in SLE_11_SP3.
So can we disable the builds for SP2 and SP3 by default, and only
enable them in a per-package basis? I just did a quick count and I
think there are only FIVE packages building a
Cristian Morales Vega Sun, 17 Nov 2013 01:30:03
+0300:
We have "SLE-11-SP2", "SLE_11" and "SLE_11_SP3".
By definition, a package built against SLE_11 will work in SLE_11_SP3.
So can we disable the builds for SP2 and SP3 by default, and only
enable them in a per-package basis? I just did a qu
On Sun, 17 Nov 2013 12:14:01 +0300
"Dmitriy Perlow" wrote:
> Cristian Morales Vega Sun, 17 Nov 2013
> 01:30:03 +0300:
>
> > We have "SLE-11-SP2", "SLE_11" and "SLE_11_SP3".
> > By definition, a package built against SLE_11 will work in
> > SLE_11_SP3.
> >
> > So can we disable the builds for SP
Stefan Botter Sun, 17 Nov 2013 12:24:52 +0300:
On Sun, 17 Nov 2013 12:14:01 +0300
"Dmitriy Perlow" wrote:
Hello!
Why should SLE SP0-SP2 be supported?
SLE11 is still supported by SuSE in all it's SP levels (from what I
can see from their web site).
Greetings,
Stefan
Sorry, I didn't know
Am 16.11.2013 23:30, schrieb Cristian Morales Vega:
> We have "SLE-11-SP2", "SLE_11" and "SLE_11_SP3".
> By definition, a package built against SLE_11 will work in SLE_11_SP3.
>
> So can we disable the builds for SP2 and SP3 by default, and only
> enable them in a per-package basis? I just did a q
On 17 November 2013 18:21, Christian wrote:
> SLE_11 is 'GA' and is obsolete.
> so you should at least use SLE_11_SP1 to build against.
This has been announced somewhere?
> And just one question left:
> Why is 'obs' (b.o.o) offering three (SP1-3) to build against, when it
> would be enough to bu
Am 17.11.2013 21:20, schrieb Cristian Morales Vega:
> On 17 November 2013 18:21, Christian wrote:
>> SLE_11 is 'GA' and is obsolete.
>> so you should at least use SLE_11_SP1 to build against.
>
> This has been announced somewhere?
Do you still get updates for GA? No
have a look here:
https://www.
On Sun, 17 Nov 2013 22:04:54 +0100
Christian wrote:
> Am 17.11.2013 21:20, schrieb Cristian Morales Vega:
> > On 17 November 2013 18:21, Christian wrote:
> >> SLE_11 is 'GA' and is obsolete.
> >> so you should at least use SLE_11_SP1 to build against.
> >
> > This has been announced somewhere?
Hi all,
Am 17.11.2013 10:24, schrieb Stefan Botter:
> On Sun, 17 Nov 2013 12:14:01 +0300
>> Hello!
>> Why should SLE SP0-SP2 be supported?
>
> SLE11 is still supported by SuSE in all it's SP levels (from what I
> can see from their web site).
No, you can only buy "Long-Term-Service-Pack-Support"
On Mon 18 Nov 2013 01:51:05 PM CST, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>Am 17.11.2013 10:24, schrieb Stefan Botter:
>> On Sun, 17 Nov 2013 12:14:01 +0300
>>> Hello!
>>> Why should SLE SP0-SP2 be supported?
>>
>> SLE11 is still supported by SuSE in all it's SP levels (from what I
>> can see from th
Hey,
On 18.11.2013 09:04, Stefan Botter wrote:
> OK, this is a fine documentation on the support cycle.
> I do not know about the status of GA, but according to the SuSE website
> you can buy LTSS for up to 5 years support on any SP.
No one that is using packman is using LTSS, trust me. LTSS has
On 18 November 2013 13:54, Hendrik Vogelsang wrote:
> Let's build for the latest SP that is available, forget about the rest.
Anybody has anything to say against this?
___
Packman mailing list
Packman@links2linux.de
http://lists.links2linux.de/cgi-bin/
On Wed 04 Dec 2013 09:45:54 PM CST, Cristian Morales Vega wrote:
>On 18 November 2013 13:54, Hendrik Vogelsang
> wrote:
>> Let's build for the latest SP that is available, forget about the
>> rest.
>
>Anybody has anything to say against this?
Hi
I only use the latest SP...so go for it IMHO.
--
C
Am 18.11.2013 14:54, schrieb Hendrik Vogelsang:
> Hey,
>
> On 18.11.2013 09:04, Stefan Botter wrote:
>
>> OK, this is a fine documentation on the support cycle.
>> I do not know about the status of GA, but according to the SuSE website
>> you can buy LTSS for up to 5 years support on any SP.
>
>
Dnia poniedziałek, 18 listopada 2013 14:54:31 Hendrik Vogelsang pisze:
> And without LTSS, SPs are only supported until 6 months after the next SP.
>
> Let's build for the latest SP that is available, forget about the rest.
+1
And we could keep SP# repository online for half year, when SP#+1 is a
Yast lists several newer versions for packages from Packman, but when I
try to update them i get an error message (example):
Download failed:
File
'./Essentials/i586/gstreamer-0_10-plugins-good-0.10.22-9991.pm.9994.12.i586.rpm'
not found on medium
'http://ftp.halifax.rwth-aachen.de/packma
Hi,
I face the same problem as this report
http://lists.links2linux.de/pipermail/packman/2011-March/009781.html
Joachim Schrod (as this reply
http://lists.links2linux.de/pipermail/packman/2011-March/009819.html) says
that zypper can't be used no longer for < 11.2.
I would like to know if SLE SP1
* Stephan van den Akker schrieb am 03.07.11 um 09:28 Uhr:
> Yast lists several newer versions for packages from Packman, but when I
> try to update them i get an error message (example):
>
> Download failed:
> File
> './Essentials/i586/gstreamer-0_10-plugins-good-0.10.22-9991.pm.9994.12.i58
* Marc Schiffbauer schrieb am 04.07.11 um 23:27 Uhr:
> * Stephan van den Akker schrieb am 03.07.11 um 09:28 Uhr:
> > Yast lists several newer versions for packages from Packman, but when I
> > try to update them i get an error message (example):
> >
> > Download failed:
> > File
> > './Esse
Hi,
Changing the pacman mirror and I don't see this issue.
Regards,
Toan Le
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Toan H. Le wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I face the same problem as this report
> http://lists.links2linux.de/pipermail/packman/2011-March/009781.html
>
> Joachim Schrod (as this reply
> http://list
20 matches
Mail list logo
