Re: dselect is a liar
On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 01:04:39PM -0700, Mike Fedyk wrote: On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 05:45:39PM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 09:06:41PM -0700, Mike Fedyk wrote: Add some deb lines that point to mirrors in the USA (or whatever other country that doesn't have trouble) to the bottom of your sources.list file. Some of the austrailian mirrors have been known to be out of sync with the rest of debian. This way, if they have old data, you'll get data from the USA, if the AU servers are in sync, you'll get it from there because apt prefers the servers at the top of the config file... Mike what, then, does deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian ... point to? Is it resolved to an Australian server when it sees that I'm requesting files from there? Bruce. Hmm... try http.us.debian.org instead to see if that helps. In general practice, I would avoid ftp.debian.org, as it is already busy enough. Ok, at the moment I have tried these lines (not at the same time) deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian unstable main contrib non-free deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian unstable main contrib non-free deb ftp://ftp.us.debian.org/deban unstable main contrib non-free in /etc/apt/sources.list after a fresh update each time, dselect is adamant that lyx is current at version 1.1.4-3 which is older than the current stable version... http://packages.debian.org/stable/text/lyx.htm advertises version 1.1.4-7 http://packages.debian.org/unstable/text/lyx.htm advertises 1.1.6fix3-1 I'm confused! Might this have something to do with either my architecture (powerpc) or my isp?
Re: dselect is a liar
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 06:45:38PM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: after a fresh update each time, dselect is adamant that lyx is current at version 1.1.4-3 which is older than the current stable version... http://packages.debian.org/stable/text/lyx.htm advertises version 1.1.4-7 http://packages.debian.org/unstable/text/lyx.htm advertises 1.1.6fix3-1 I'm confused! Might this have something to do with either my architecture (powerpc) or my isp? At the moment, packages.debian.org quotes versions for i386 only. Here's some more accurate information: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ madison lyx lyx |1.1.4-3 |stable | powerpc lyx |1.1.4-3 | testing | powerpc lyx |1.1.4-3 | unstable | powerpc lyx |1.1.4-7 |stable | source, alpha, i386, m68k lyx |1.1.4-7 | testing | m68k lyx |1.1.4-7 | unstable | m68k lyx | 1.1.5fix2-1 | testing | source, alpha, i386 lyx | 1.1.5fix2-1 | unstable | alpha lyx | 1.1.6fix3-1 | unstable | source, i386 So lyx is indeed out of date on powerpc, probably because it's in the contrib section and the autobuilders don't always keep religiously up to date with that. By the way: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mail-Followup-To: Bruce, McIntyre, debian-user@lists.debian.org Your From: and Mail-Followup-To: lines are broken. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dselect is a liar
Colin Watson wrote: On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 06:45:38PM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: after a fresh update each time, dselect is adamant that lyx is current at version 1.1.4-3 which is older than the current stable version... http://packages.debian.org/stable/text/lyx.htm advertises version 1.1.4-7 http://packages.debian.org/unstable/text/lyx.htm advertises 1.1.6fix3-1 I'm confused! Might this have something to do with either my architecture (powerpc) or my isp? At the moment, packages.debian.org quotes versions for i386 only. Here's some more accurate information: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ madison lyx lyx |1.1.4-3 |stable | powerpc lyx |1.1.4-7 |stable | source, alpha, i386, m68k So lyx is indeed out of date on powerpc, probably because it's in the contrib section and the autobuilders don't always keep religiously up to date with that. As a maintainer of several contrib packages that depend on XForms, I can say that autobuilders _don't_ process contrib at all. I've had to ask admins to temporarily install libforms-dev so that I could build the packages on non-i386 arches; some of them don't want to. I've had to file many bugs against ftp.debian.org to get old versions of non-i386 binary packages deleted from the archive to let packages migrate to testing. It a big pain. Maintaining a contrib package is more work than maintaining a non-free one! I don't recommend it. Hopefully, this will end soon. XForms is _supposed_ to become free very soon. Then lyx will be in main too, and powerpc will be uptodate. Peter
Re: dselect is a liar
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 11:08:18AM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote: Colin Watson wrote: So lyx is indeed out of date on powerpc, probably because it's in the contrib section and the autobuilders don't always keep religiously up to date with that. As a maintainer of several contrib packages that depend on XForms, I can say that autobuilders _don't_ process contrib at all. I've had to ask admins to temporarily install libforms-dev so that I could build the packages on non-i386 arches; some of them don't want to. I've had to file many bugs against ftp.debian.org to get old versions of non-i386 binary packages deleted from the archive to let packages migrate to testing. It a big pain. Maintaining a contrib package is more work than maintaining a non-free one! I don't recommend it. Hopefully, this will end soon. XForms is _supposed_ to become free very soon. Then lyx will be in main too, and powerpc will be uptodate. Thank God. I have one XForms-dependent package too (not an important one by any stretch of the imagination, though), and had to do the same thing for various architectures. I was actually thinking about orphaning it in favour of somebody who had time to convert it to FLTK. Do you think it'll be free before optional packages freeze for woody? -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dselect is a liar
Colin Watson wrote: On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 11:08:18AM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote: As a maintainer of several contrib packages that depend on XForms, I can say that autobuilders _don't_ process contrib at all. I've had to ask admins to temporarily install libforms-dev so that I could build the packages on non-i386 arches; some of them don't want to. I've had to file many bugs against ftp.debian.org to get old versions of non-i386 binary packages deleted from the archive to let packages migrate to testing. It a big pain. Maintaining a contrib package is more work than maintaining a non-free one! I don't recommend it. Hopefully, this will end soon. XForms is _supposed_ to become free very soon. Then lyx will be in main too, and powerpc will be uptodate. Thank God. I have one XForms-dependent package too (not an important one by any stretch of the imagination, though), and had to do the same thing for various architectures. I was actually thinking about orphaning it in favour of somebody who had time to convert it to FLTK. FLTK is C++ only. Show stopper for me. Do you think it'll be free before optional packages freeze for woody? I would think so. The XForms author is busy with real life; that's the main hurdle. He had committed to this before and not come through, but never with a public announcement like he did a few weeks ago. You can be sure I'll upload an XForms package for main as soon as it does. Peter
Re: dselect is a liar
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 09:06:41PM -0700, Mike Fedyk wrote: On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 01:51:50PM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 12:38:56AM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jul 11, 2001 at 01:19:49PM +1000, Bruce McIntyre wrote: when i fire up dselect, it tells me that fetchmail version 5.8.11-1 is availible. when i check the same on the website it states that version 5.8.12.1 is current my problem is that fetchmailconf 5.8.12-1 depends on the latter version, which dselect doesn't know about. the pertinent section in /etc/apt/sources.list reads: deb http://ftp.au.debian.org/pub/debian unstable main contrib non-free deb http://ftp.au.debian.org/pub/debian-non-US unstable/non-US main contrib non-free deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian unstable main contrib non-free deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US unstable/non-US main contrib non-free is this wrong ? I don't mean to flood the list here---but I thought the subject header was not so very clear. I am wondering if this problem is linked to the archives not present problem some people are having. Bruce McIntyre. Add some deb lines that point to mirrors in the USA (or whatever other country that doesn't have trouble) to the bottom of your sources.list file. Some of the austrailian mirrors have been known to be out of sync with the rest of debian. This way, if they have old data, you'll get data from the USA, if the AU servers are in sync, you'll get it from there because apt prefers the servers at the top of the config file... Mike what, then, does deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian ... point to? Is it resolved to an Australian server when it sees that I'm requesting files from there? Bruce.
Re: dselect is a liar
On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 05:45:39PM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 09:06:41PM -0700, Mike Fedyk wrote: Add some deb lines that point to mirrors in the USA (or whatever other country that doesn't have trouble) to the bottom of your sources.list file. Some of the austrailian mirrors have been known to be out of sync with the rest of debian. This way, if they have old data, you'll get data from the USA, if the AU servers are in sync, you'll get it from there because apt prefers the servers at the top of the config file... Mike what, then, does deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian ... point to? Is it resolved to an Australian server when it sees that I'm requesting files from there? Bruce. Hmm... try http.us.debian.org instead to see if that helps. In general practice, I would avoid ftp.debian.org, as it is already busy enough. Mike
Re: dselect is a liar
On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 01:51:50PM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 12:38:56AM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jul 11, 2001 at 01:19:49PM +1000, Bruce McIntyre wrote: when i fire up dselect, it tells me that fetchmail version 5.8.11-1 is availible. when i check the same on the website it states that version 5.8.12.1 is current my problem is that fetchmailconf 5.8.12-1 depends on the latter version, which dselect doesn't know about. the pertinent section in /etc/apt/sources.list reads: deb http://ftp.au.debian.org/pub/debian unstable main contrib non-free deb http://ftp.au.debian.org/pub/debian-non-US unstable/non-US main contrib non-free deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian unstable main contrib non-free deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US unstable/non-US main contrib non-free is this wrong ? ... I don't mean to flood the list here---but I thought the subject header was not so very clear. I am wondering if this problem is linked to the archives not present problem some people are having. Bruce McIntyre. Add some deb lines that point to mirrors in the USA (or whatever other country that doesn't have trouble) to the bottom of your sources.list file. Some of the austrailian mirrors have been known to be out of sync with the rest of debian. This way, if they have old data, you'll get data from the USA, if the AU servers are in sync, you'll get it from there because apt prefers the servers at the top of the config file... Mike
dselect is a liar
On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 12:38:56AM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jul 11, 2001 at 01:19:49PM +1000, Bruce McIntyre wrote: when i fire up dselect, it tells me that fetchmail version 5.8.11-1 is availible. when i check the same on the website it states that version 5.8.12.1 is current my problem is that fetchmailconf 5.8.12-1 depends on the latter version, which dselect doesn't know about. the pertinent section in /etc/apt/sources.list reads: deb http://ftp.au.debian.org/pub/debian unstable main contrib non-free deb http://ftp.au.debian.org/pub/debian-non-US unstable/non-US main contrib non-free deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian unstable main contrib non-free deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US unstable/non-US main contrib non-free is this wrong ? still having the same problem but: dselect available website packages search says : says : fetchmail 5.8-14-15.8.14-2 fetchmailconf 5.8.14-25.8.14-2 fetchmail-ssl 5.8.11-15.8.14-2 this still mucks up the dependencies for fetchmail and fetchmailconf. there is a similar issue with xmame and xmame-x, the versions are different, and so the dependencies cannot be fufilled. Any help would be much appreciated. I don't mean to flood the list here---but I thought the subject header was not so very clear. I am wondering if this problem is linked to the archives not present problem some people are having. Bruce McIntyre.
