On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 03:27:01PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
Pigeon wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 02:52:12AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 08:26:32AM +1200, cr wrote:
I appreciate that dselect is only part of the install process, albeit the
largest part timewise
On Saturday 27 September 2003 2:18 am, Terry Hancock wrote:
On Friday 26 September 2003 10:29 am, Pigeon wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 02:52:12AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 08:26:32AM +1200, cr wrote:
I appreciate that dselect is only part of the install process,
On Friday 26 September 2003 5:31 pm, cr wrote:
On Thursday 25 September 2003 03:24, Sebastian Kapfer wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:40:14 +0200, cr wrote:
... having just recovered from another screaming encounter with
dselect.
One word: aptitude
Thanks, I'll bear 'aptitude' in mind
Pigeon wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 02:52:12AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 08:26:32AM +1200, cr wrote:
I appreciate that dselect is only part of the install process, albeit the
largest part timewise if one uses it.
You don't have to, though.
Yeah, but
cr wrote:
I appreciate that dselect is only part of the install process, albeit the
largest part timewise if one uses it. What makes it frustrating is that,
while working through the huge list of apps in dselect (which isn't the most
intuitive piece of software ever written ;)it's
On Friday 26 September 2003 10:29 am, Pigeon wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 02:52:12AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 08:26:32AM +1200, cr wrote:
I appreciate that dselect is only part of the install process, albeit the
largest part timewise if one uses it.
You
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:40:14 +0200, cr wrote:
... having just recovered from another screaming encounter with dselect.
One word: aptitude
--
Best Regards, | Wer Windows-Rechner ins Internet lsst,
Sebastian | braucht nicht ber SWEN stnkern!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 06:30:07 +0200, Ron Johnson wrote:
Now, if RH wants to admit to the error in it's ways and move to
dpkg/apt/deb,
Haven't they adopted APT already? Somehow I doubt they'll ever sacrifice
rpm :-)
--
Best Regards, | Wer Windows-Rechner ins Internet lsst,
Sebastian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 07:19:10PM +1200, cr wrote:
Just so long as RH apply their excellent installer to Debian;)
Oh, dear god NO! RH's installer blows badly. Just wait for
debian-installer to come out to replace boot-floppies or use Knoppix
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 06:11:53PM +0200, Sven Hoexter wrote:
1) apt-rpm is a piece of shit compared to apt-get due to RPM
stupidity.
Aehm the only difference I can find from user standpoint is that
apt-rpm is slower cause auf the rpmlib.
On Wednesday 24 September 2003 20:59, Colin Watson wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 07:19:10PM +1200, cr wrote:
... having just recovered from another screaming encounter with dselect.
If I ever have to face that Debian installer again I'll... I'll...
dselect is not what people usually mean
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 07:46:59PM +0200, Sven Hoexter wrote:
IMHO the lousy but my debian has apt-get install argumentation
is out of date for quite some time.
Not at all. See my prior post about this issue to see why.
- --
.''`. Paul
On Thursday 25 September 2003 03:24, Sebastian Kapfer wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:40:14 +0200, cr wrote:
... having just recovered from another screaming encounter with dselect.
One word: aptitude
Thanks, I'll bear 'aptitude' in mind (though I tend to be lazy and use
kpackage wherever
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 08:26:32AM +1200, cr wrote:
I appreciate that dselect is only part of the install process, albeit the
largest part timewise if one uses it.
You don't have to, though.
What makes it frustrating is that,
while working
On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 16:31, cr wrote:
On Thursday 25 September 2003 03:24, Sebastian Kapfer wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:40:14 +0200, cr wrote:
... having just recovered from another screaming encounter with dselect.
One word: aptitude
Thanks, I'll bear 'aptitude' in mind (though I
On (27/09/03 08:26), cr wrote:
I appreciate that dselect is only part of the install process, albeit the
largest part timewise if one uses it. What makes it frustrating is that,
while working through the huge list of apps in dselect (which isn't the most
intuitive piece of software ever
On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 04:52, Paul Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 08:26:32AM +1200, cr wrote:
[snip]
No software is intuitive, it's all learned. The only intuitive
interface is the nipple, the rest is in your head.
Bzzzt. Even newborns
On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 05:03, Alex Malinovich wrote:
On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 16:31, cr wrote:
On Thursday 25 September 2003 03:24, Sebastian Kapfer wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:40:14 +0200, cr wrote:
... having just recovered from another screaming encounter with dselect.
One word:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 02:15:18AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 06:11:53PM +0200, Sven Hoexter wrote:
1) apt-rpm is a piece of shit compared to apt-get due to RPM
stupidity.
Aehm the only difference I can find from user standpoint is that
apt-rpm is slower cause
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 04:21:49PM +0200, Sven Hoexter wrote:
All your complains are right but they have _nothing_ to do witch apt-get!
Nor have they (with exception of point 1) something to do with rpm.
Actually, they do. Lack of standardised
On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 06:43, Ron Johnson wrote:
--snip--
Call me weird, but unless I'm only installing one or two packages (which
I'll just use apt-get to do) I think dselect is the best tool for the
job. It lets you see recommended and suggested packages while
automatically showing you
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 02:52:12AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 08:26:32AM +1200, cr wrote:
I appreciate that dselect is only part of the install process, albeit the
largest part timewise if one uses it.
You don't have to, though.
Yeah, but what are the choices?
On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 13:18, Alex Malinovich wrote:
On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 06:43, Ron Johnson wrote:
--snip--
Call me weird, but unless I'm only installing one or two packages (which
I'll just use apt-get to do) I think dselect is the best tool for the
job. It lets you see recommended
On Friday 26 September 2003 21:52, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 08:26:32AM +1200, cr wrote:
I appreciate that dselect is only part of the install process, albeit the
largest part timewise if one uses it.
You don't have to, though.
What makes it frustrating is that,
while
On Friday 26 September 2003 22:03, Alex Malinovich wrote:
On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 16:31, cr wrote:
(snip)
dselect is actually not so bad on a one-app basis, it's trying to use it
to select all the apps for an install where it rapidly gets old.;)
Call me weird, but unless I'm only
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 08:01:12AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 04:21:49PM +0200, Sven Hoexter wrote:
All your complains are right but they have _nothing_ to do witch apt-get!
Nor have they (with exception of point 1) something to do with rpm.
Actually, they do. Lack
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 09:52:35PM -0500, Terry Hancock wrote:
I don't think people should get paranoid about Red Hat as if it were
competing with Debian for some critical resource.
Mostly for two reasons:
1) apt-rpm is a piece of shit compared to
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 03:43:00AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 09:52:35PM -0500, Terry Hancock wrote:
I don't think people should get paranoid about Red Hat as if it were
competing with Debian for some critical resource.
Mostly for two reasons:
1) apt-rpm is a
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 11:11, Sven Hoexter wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 03:43:00AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 09:52:35PM -0500, Terry Hancock wrote:
I don't think people should get paranoid about Red Hat as if it were
competing with Debian for some critical
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 12:05:30PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 11:11, Sven Hoexter wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 03:43:00AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 09:52:35PM -0500, Terry Hancock wrote:
I don't think people should get paranoid about Red
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 12:46, Sven Hoexter wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 12:05:30PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 11:11, Sven Hoexter wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 03:43:00AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 09:52:35PM -0500, Terry Hancock wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 06:11:53PM +0200, Sven Hoexter wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 03:43:00AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
1) apt-rpm is a piece of shit compared to apt-get due to RPM
stupidity.
Aehm the only difference I can find from user standpoint is that
apt-rpm is slower cause auf
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 01:38:30PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
Hi,
I think in generall this topic is a little bit off topic here.
If you feel that it doesn't belong here please write a PM.
I'd be interested to see what percentage of users use apt4rpm, and
Well apt4rpm != apt-rpm.
apt4rpm [1] is a
Alex Malinovich [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Does anyone remember gcc 2.96?
I remember there were some bugs, they were fixed pretty early in the
cycle, and most of the whining was about code that would have had the
exact same problems in gcc 3.0 when it was released. So people who
didn't make the
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 07:19:10PM +1200, cr wrote:
... having just recovered from another screaming encounter with dselect.
If I ever have to face that Debian installer again I'll... I'll...
dselect is not what people usually mean when they talk about the Debian
installer ...
--
On Wednesday 24 September 2003 11:03, Paul E Condon wrote:
RedHat's business model is moving toward support services for enterprises
and away from sale of boxed sets of CDs. I don't think it makes much
sense for them to continue work on the RedHat Linux distribution, but I
can see why they
On Wednesday 24 September 2003 12:20 am, Ron Johnson wrote:
That would be a possible theory if Debian RH both use the same
package manager. Now, if RH wants to admit to the error in it's
ways and move to dpkg/apt/deb, it could be an enterprise version
of Libranet, and, since it charges for
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 11:20:01PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 20:28, Terry Hancock wrote:
It occurs to me that that might very well be a near-ideal and possibly
planned outcome. If I were running Red Hat, I would probably think
so. No need to scent conspiracy theories
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 07:19:10PM +1200, cr wrote:
On Wednesday 24 September 2003 11:03, Paul E Condon wrote:
Hi,
I think they would save themselves a lot of head aches if they did move to
Debian. This collective support of the RedHat distribution, without selling
CDs looks to me like
..this too makes a neat installer: http://damnsmalllinux.org/
--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 10:01, Sven Hoexter wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 11:20:01PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 20:28, Terry Hancock wrote:
It occurs to me that that might very well be a near-ideal and possibly
planned outcome. If I were running Red Hat, I would
On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 09:38, Alfredo Valles wrote:
On Wednesday 24 September 2003 12:20 am, Ron Johnson wrote:
That would be a possible theory if Debian RH both use the same
package manager. Now, if RH wants to admit to the error in it's
ways and move to dpkg/apt/deb, it could be an
Hi all.
Seems to me that for the first time debian is going to have real competition
in its own field.
Red Hat announced that they will join with fedora community and produce the
Red Hat Linux Project. So they will have almost the same model of development
that debian.
Isn't that amazing for a
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 03:55:47PM -0400, Alfredo Valles wrote:
Hi all.
Seems to me that for the first time debian is going to have real competition
in its own field.
Red Hat announced that they will join with fedora community and produce the
Red Hat Linux Project. So they will have
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 03:55:47PM -0400, Alfredo Valles wrote:
Hi all.
Seems to me that for the first time debian is going to have real competition
in its own field.
Red Hat announced that they will join with fedora community and produce the
Red Hat Linux Project. So they will have
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 16:51:36 -0500
Alex Malinovich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 03:55:47PM -0400, Alfredo Valles wrote:
Hi all.
Seems to me that for the first time debian is going to have real
competition in its own field.
Red Hat announced that they will join with
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 06:49:12AM +0800, David Palmer. wrote:
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 16:51:36 -0500
Alex Malinovich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 03:55:47PM -0400, Alfredo Valles wrote:
Hi all.
Seems to me that for the first time debian is going to have real
On Tuesday 23 September 2003 06:03 pm, Paul E Condon wrote:
RedHat's business model is moving toward support services for enterprises
and away from sale of boxed sets of CDs. I don't think it makes much
sense for them to continue work on the RedHat Linux distribution, but I
can see why they
On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 20:28, Terry Hancock wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2003 06:03 pm, Paul E Condon wrote:
RedHat's business model is moving toward support services for enterprises
and away from sale of boxed sets of CDs. I don't think it makes much
sense for them to continue work on
49 matches
Mail list logo
