Re: glib-version 2.0 1.2.6 ?
Hallo Uwe, Hast Du mal nachgeschaut, wie das configure nach der glib sucht. Mein Verdacht ist, dass er die Ausgabe von glib-config --version parsen will. Hab mal nachgeschaut (in configure), hab da auch was gefunden, was ich aber nicht deuten kann. (Sollte mich wohl mehr mit C/C++ auseinander setzen... Also wohl entweder glib1.2 mit dem develpaket installieren Dazu müßte ich - wie Adrian Bunk mir empfiehlt - downgraden auf libglib1.2? (der Unterschied zwischen -4 und -6 ist stable und testing, muss halt auch zusammenpassen - richtige Option zu apt-get waehlen), Hatte irgendwann mal 'unstable' in der sources.list, hab das aber etwas vorschnell getan. Downgraden scheint mir hier das Mittel der Wahl zu sein. Fragt sich nur noch wie. Aber das kann ja wohl er-google-t werden. oder das configure-skript umschreiben oder von Hand compilieren. Mit meinen Programmierkenntnissen lass ich das wohl besser. Kai P.S.: Danke für die schnelle Antwort -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
Re: glib-version 2.0 1.2.6 ?
Hallo Adrian, in config.log findest du die genaue Fehlermeldung. Eine wirkliche Fehlermeldung hab ich nicht gefunden. Die letzte Zeile lautet: configure: exit 1 Und als ich nach '$? = 1' gesucht habe, hab ich diverse Fehlermeldungen vom gcc gesehen. Du hast libglib1.2 aus testing oder unstable installiert aber nur stable in deiner sources.list. Wie ich Uwe Zeisberger schon geschrieben habe, hatte ich zeitweise unstable in meiner sources.list. Daher die verschiedenen Versionen. Entweder du downgradest libglib1.2 oder Das habe ich jetzt vor. (Weg wird gerade er-google-t.) du nimmst testing oder unstable wieder in deine sources.list auf. Nachdem ich hier einige Threads über stable vs. unstable vs. testing gelesen habe, werde ich wohl doch eher bei stable bleiben. Wenn ich einen downgrade hinbekomme. Evtl. musst du noch ein wenig basteln bis Sylpheed mit libglib2.0 kompiliert? Nach INSTALL sollte es auch mit Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 (woody) (glibc 2.2.5) compiliert werden können. Danke für die schnelle Antwort. Kai -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
glib-version 2.0 1.2.6 ?
Hallo Liste, ich wollte mir gerade sylpheed selbst kompilieren, damit auch gpg etc. unterstützt wird, und siehe da, eine Fehlermeldung, die ich nicht verstehe, weil ich bis jetzt (fast) alles an Abhängigkeiten mit deselect oder aptitude aufgelöst habe. Hier die Fehlermeldung: checking for GLIB - version = 1.2.6... no *** The glib-config script installed by GLIB could not be found *** If GLIB was installed in PREFIX, make sure PREFIX/bin is in *** your path, or set the GLIB_CONFIG environment variable to the *** full path to glib-config. configure: error: Test for GLIB failed. See the file 'INSTALL' for help. Dann hab ich mal nachgesehen, ob glib wirklich in einer kleineren Version vorliegt: # apt-cache search glib -schnipp-- libglib2.0-0 - The GLib library of C routines schnapp--- google hat mir gesagt, daß ich für solcherlei Probleme die devel-Variante benötige: # apt-get install libglib1.2-dev Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies: libglib1.2-dev: Depends: libglib1.2 (= 1.2.10-4) but 1.2.10-6 is to be installed E: Sorry, broken packages Und auch die devel-Variante von 2.0 ist hier: # apt-get install libglib2.0-dev Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done Sorry, libglib2.0-dev is already the newest version. 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. An Pfaden hab ich auch nichts selbst gesetzt. Any hints? Danke im Voraus. Kai -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
Re: glib-version 2.0 1.2.6 ?
On Tue, Feb 11, 2003 at 03:21:30PM +0100, Kai Wassermann wrote: Hallo Liste, Hallo Kai, ich wollte mir gerade sylpheed selbst kompilieren, damit auch gpg etc. unterstützt wird, und siehe da, eine Fehlermeldung, die ich nicht verstehe, weil ich bis jetzt (fast) alles an Abhängigkeiten mit deselect oder aptitude aufgelöst habe. Hier die Fehlermeldung: checking for GLIB - version = 1.2.6... no *** The glib-config script installed by GLIB could not be found ... in config.log findest du die genaue Fehlermeldung. # apt-get install libglib1.2-dev Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies: libglib1.2-dev: Depends: libglib1.2 (= 1.2.10-4) but 1.2.10-6 is to be installed E: Sorry, broken packages Du hast libglib1.2 aus testing oder unstable installiert aber nur stable in deiner sources.list. Entweder du downgradest libglib1.2 oder du nimmst testing oder unstable wieder in deine sources.list auf. Und auch die devel-Variante von 2.0 ist hier: # apt-get install libglib2.0-dev Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done Sorry, libglib2.0-dev is already the newest version. 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. ... Evtl. musst du noch ein wenig basteln bis Sylpheed mit libglib2.0 kompiliert? Danke im Voraus. Kai Gruss Adrian -- Is there not promise of rain? Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. Only a promise, Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
Re: glib-version 2.0 1.2.6 ?
Kai Wassermann wrote: Hallo Liste, ich wollte mir gerade sylpheed selbst kompilieren, damit auch gpg etc. unterstützt wird, und siehe da, eine Fehlermeldung, die ich nicht verstehe, weil ich bis jetzt (fast) alles an Abhängigkeiten mit deselect oder aptitude aufgelöst habe. Hier die Fehlermeldung: checking for GLIB - version = 1.2.6... no *** The glib-config script installed by GLIB could not be found *** If GLIB was installed in PREFIX, make sure PREFIX/bin is in *** your path, or set the GLIB_CONFIG environment variable to the *** full path to glib-config. configure: error: Test for GLIB failed. See the file 'INSTALL' for help. Hast Du mal nachgeschaut, wie das configure nach der glib sucht. Mein Verdacht ist, dass er die Ausgabe von glib-config --version parsen will. Ab der glib-2.0 gibt es aber ein (tolleres|anderes) Skript dafuer, naemlich pkg-config. Zudem kann es passieren, dass es inkompatibilitaeten zwischen den Major-Versionen gibt. Also wohl entweder glib1.2 mit dem develpaket installieren # apt-get install libglib1.2-dev Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies: libglib1.2-dev: Depends: libglib1.2 (= 1.2.10-4) but 1.2.10-6 is to be installed E: Sorry, broken packages (der Unterschied zwischen -4 und -6 ist stable und testing, muss halt auch zusammenpassen - richtige Option zu apt-get waehlen), oder das configure-skript umschreiben oder von Hand compilieren. Gruessle Uwe -- Uwe Zeisberger 5 out of 4 people have trouble with fractions. -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
Linux Today - LinuxPR: New Libranet GNU/Linux Version 2.0 Released
No I do not work for Libranet, but thought all of you who are on the debian list, might want to check it out...I myself have been using Libranets CD's since they first came out...An easy install, plus a full year of on-line help, and libranets user list at [EMAIL PROTECTED], for those that still have questions that can be answered by another Libranet User... Libranet has been trying to make there Debian setup more user friendly for 'new, and old Debian Users' :-) ... If anyone is interested you can visit the Website at www.libranet.com ;-) Larry http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2002-02-06-012-20-PR 73 de Larry/wd9esu E-Mail addr: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by Debian GNU/Linux 1.9.1 by Libranet This is 'Linux Country' On a quiet night, you can hear WINDOZE! systems rebooting!!!...
Version 2.0 to 2.1 upgrade
Hi All I just updated from 2.0 to 2.1. Everything went smoothly except for the sendmail installation. Sendmail found my existing install and asked me whether I wanted to keep it or not, I said keep. Unfortunately there seem to be a few side effects with this. 1) sendmail.cf has been moved from /etc to /etc/mail, but the script /etc/init.d/sendmail checks for the existence if the /etc/sendmail.cf command before it executes anything. 2) I found that submitting mail from the Linux box worked but submitting it from a workstation did not, giving an error about relaying. The only way I could get round this was to add domain names for all my clients into the /etc/mail/relay-domains file. This seems to work, but it is a real drag. Thank God I did the upgrade over the weekend. Are there any better ways to address these problems? Am I the only one to have seen these problems? TIA --- | Simon Martin | By definition, all software is faulty. | | Project Manager | It is just a mere coincidence if it| | Isys | ever seems to work ;-)| --- mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by Debian Linux
Re: Version 2.0 to 2.1 upgrade
On Sun, 14 Mar 1999, Simon Martin wrote: 1) sendmail.cf has been moved from /etc to /etc/mail, but the script /etc/init.d/sendmail checks for the existence if the /etc/sendmail.cf command before it executes anything. There should be a file /etc/init.d/sendmail.dpkg-new -- you might want to replace the /etc/init.d/sendmail file with this one so that it looks in the right place. 2) I found that submitting mail from the Linux box worked but submitting it from a workstation did not, giving an error about relaying. The only way I could get round this was to add domain names for all my clients into the /etc/mail/relay-domains file. This seems to work, but it is a real drag. Thank God I did the upgrade over the weekend. This relaying protection is actually something that you definitely DO want. If you're running sendmail open to all relaying on the Internet, before long some spammer will discover it and happily steal your bandwidth and cpu to send their crap all over the Internet, possibly resulting in the blacklisting of your mailhost stopping you from mailing about 30% of the net. You should be able to use appropriate wildcards in the relay-domains file so you don't have to do it by host, but by IP ranges (172.16.*) or whole domains (*.example.com). Yes it's more of a pain than unrestricted access, but having your mailer exploited by spammers is more of a pain than anything (and many people will dislike you for it.) hope this helps, -thomas .. please forgive my abrupt ending hre - but my conection is xtrememleyyhiclmelyey BAD hiccuppy etc must sign off - EF D8 33 68 B3 E3 E9 D2 C1 3E 51 22 8A AA 7B 98 umbra (!)
RE: Version 2.0 to 2.1 upgrade
Thanks Thomas, Works like a dream and it even makes sense! -Original Message- From: thomas lakofski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 14 March 1999 11:19 To: Simon Martin Cc: Debian-user list Subject: Re: Version 2.0 to 2.1 upgrade On Sun, 14 Mar 1999, Simon Martin wrote: 1) sendmail.cf has been moved from /etc to /etc/mail, but the script /etc/init.d/sendmail checks for the existence if the /etc/sendmail.cf command before it executes anything. There should be a file /etc/init.d/sendmail.dpkg-new -- you might want to replace the /etc/init.d/sendmail file with this one so that it looks in the right place. 2) I found that submitting mail from the Linux box worked but submitting it from a workstation did not, giving an error about relaying. The only way I could get round this was to add domain names for all my clients into the /etc/mail/relay-domains file. This seems to work, but it is a real drag. Thank God I did the upgrade over the weekend. This relaying protection is actually something that you definitely DO want. If you're running sendmail open to all relaying on the Internet, before long some spammer will discover it and happily steal your bandwidth and cpu to send their crap all over the Internet, possibly resulting in the blacklisting of your mailhost stopping you from mailing about 30% of the net. You should be able to use appropriate wildcards in the relay-domains file so you don't have to do it by host, but by IP ranges (172.16.*) or whole domains (*.example.com). Yes it's more of a pain than unrestricted access, but having your mailer exploited by spammers is more of a pain than anything (and many people will dislike you for it.) hope this helps, -thomas .. please forgive my abrupt ending hre - but my conection is xtrememleyyhiclmelyey BAD hiccuppy etc must sign off - EF D8 33 68 B3 E3 E9 D2 C1 3E 51 22 8A AA 7B 98 umbra (!) --- | Simon Martin | By definition, all software is faulty. | | Project Manager | It is just a mere coincidence if it| | Isys | ever seems to work ;-)| --- mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by Debian Linux
Is ssh version 2.0.x going to be added to Debian ?
I noticed that a version 2.0.x of the SSH has been released, which looked pretty cool (it has a secure ftp, for instance !). Is this going to be put into Debian at some time ? If not, what are the issue (not enough free time to do it, not-freeware-enough-license, etc) ? Thanks ! Geoff Brimhall -- Status quo is, well, boring ! --
Re: Is ssh version 2.0.x going to be added to Debian ?
On Wed, Dec 09, 1998 at 14:14:18 -0800, Geoffrey L. Brimhall wrote: Is this going to be put into Debian at some time ? Perhaps. If someone volunteers to package it. If not, what are the issue (not enough free time to do it, not-freeware-enough-license, etc) ? SSH2's license defines commercial use more broadly than SSH1. So broad, that the SSH1 maintainer isn't interested in packaging it. Ray - who encourages people to work on a free SSH 2 protocol implemenatation - see http://www.net.lut.ac.uk/psst/ -- PATRIOTISM A great British writer once said that if he had to choose between betraying his country and betraying a friend he hoped he would have the decency to betray his country. - The Hipcrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan
Version 2.0
Hi, Some are saying that 2.0.20 may be the final 2.0 version... Does debian already have 2.0.20 in its stable tree? If I buy a Debian CD, will it come with 2.0.20? Thx. Ricardo
Re: Version 2.0
If you buy a Debian CD, it may not come with 2.0.20 . However, you will be able to download a package from our FTP site and upgrade your system to 2.0.20 . It should be about 2MB for the binary kernel package, 5MB for the full kernel source. Installing a package takes a one-line shell command. 2.0.20 isn't on the FTP site now, because the two people who build kernels (Simon and I) have been busy. I guess we'd better build some. Thanks Bruce
Version 2.0
On Tue, 17 Sep 1996 13:04:18 -0700, Ricardo Kleemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Some are saying that 2.0.20 may be the final 2.0 version... Does debian already have 2.0.20 in its stable tree? I hope that's not the case, because there are bugs in the Adaptec drivers (aic7xxx) in 2.0.20 that were introduced in 2.0.13. I know because I just tripped over them. The bugs have been reported, and I'm hoping the implementors will manage to get them fixed soon. I am unable to access MS-DOS volumes from Linux kernels later than 2.0.13. Also, there are some serious problems with module versions that were introduced in 2.0.19 and have yet to be sorted out. With all that, there will almost certainly be more versions in 2.0, and I wouldn't recommend moving forward at this point if you have a kernel that basically works. -Randy -- http://cogsci.ucsd.edu/~gobbel/ NOTICE: I DO NOT ACCEPT UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL EMAIL MESSAGES OF ANY KIND. I CONSIDER SUCH MESSAGES PERSONAL HARRASSMENT AND A GROSS INVASION OF MY PRIVACY. By sending unsolicited commercial advertising/solicitations (or otherwise on or as part of a mailing list) to me via e-mail you will be indicating your consent to paying John R. (Randy) Gobbel $1,000.00 U.S.D./hour for a minimum of 1 hour for my time spent dealing with it. Payment due in 30 days upon receipt of an invoice (e-mail or regular mail) from me or my authorized representative.
Re: Version 2.0
Bruce Perens wrote: However, you will be able to download a package from our FTP site and upgrade your system to 2.0.20 . Installing a package takes a one-line shell command. So, when will the kernel-package appear on the CD-ROM distributions? I had to recompile the kernel before I could get net access, and I needed net access before I could (properly) rebuild the kernel. My problem was that the NE2000 module would crash the system when I tried to load it. For some reason, it has to be compiled into the kernel. -- +---+ . | Technical Support Engineer, Cyclades Corporation | | 800/88-CYCLADES (882-9252) or (510)770-9727, x258 | | Maker of High Performance Multiport Serial Cards | +---+
