Yöu can find söme stuff I wanted tö shöw yöu, it is merely amazing, take a
löök
http://purnellventures.com/supporter.php?UE91ZGV2QHBhY2thZ2VzLmRlYmlhbi5vcmc-
Take care, Frans Pop
___
Pkg-systemd-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-systemd-maintainers
On Saturday 07 August 2010, Neil McGovern wrote:
As there isn't a resolution in sight, I'll add a hint at the end of
August for the removal of the package unless there's significant
progress to fixing the issue.
I still feel this is an overreaction as only the original reporter has ever
seen
On Saturday 07 August 2010, Neil McGovern wrote:
As there isn't a resolution in sight, I'll add a hint at the end of
August for the removal of the package unless there's significant
progress to fixing the issue.
I still feel this is an overreaction as only the original reporter has ever
seen
On Saturday 07 August 2010, Neil McGovern wrote:
As there isn't a resolution in sight, I'll add a hint at the end of
August for the removal of the package unless there's significant
progress to fixing the issue.
I still feel this is an overreaction as only the original reporter has ever
seen
On Saturday 07 August 2010, Neil McGovern wrote:
As there isn't a resolution in sight, I'll add a hint at the end of
August for the removal of the package unless there's significant
progress to fixing the issue.
I still feel this is an overreaction as only the original reporter has ever
seen
On Saturday 07 August 2010, Neil McGovern wrote:
As there isn't a resolution in sight, I'll add a hint at the end of
August for the removal of the package unless there's significant
progress to fixing the issue.
I still feel this is an overreaction as only the original reporter has ever
seen
I uploaded a new version of debmirror yesterday with minor changes, but
including one fairly important bugfix (#590667).
Please accept for Squeeze.
TIA,
FJP
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2010 16:09:13 +0200
Source: debmirror
Binary: debmirror
Architecture: source all
Version: 1:2.4.5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Frans Pop f...@debian.org
Changed-By: Frans Pop f...@debian.org
Description
On Wednesday 28 July 2010, Stefan Kisdaroczi wrote:
the file dists/squeeze/main/installer-i386/current/images/MD5SUMS
didn't get updated on my mirror. The attached patch fixed it for me.
Thanks for reporting the issue. The patch looks correct.
Cheers,
FJP
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Thursday 05 August 2010, Thibaut Girka wrote:
Did you actually check this? The password templates are of type
'password' and thus the value should be in
/var/lib/cdebconf/passwords.dat (and thus encoded) instead of in plain
text in questions.dat.
Well, you can still db_get the
(No need to CC on replies: I read the list.)
On Thursday 05 August 2010, Thibaut Girka wrote:
If you're talking about user-setup, they are cleared, that the first
thing I've checked (better done that checking network-console, it seems)
before sending this mail.
With user-setup the passwords
On Wednesday 04 August 2010, Thibaut Girka wrote:
He starts the installation in front of the computer, sets a password,
that happen to be its daily-use one.
That's not very smart, is it?
Then, an untrustworthy colleague goes to the computer, and just
reads /var/lib/cdebconf/questions.dat:
On Sunday 01 August 2010, Lee Winter wrote:
It means that we probably need a few more DD's to look at signalled
spam for the debian-boot mailing list through
I disagree. I believe the above fact indicates that we need a better
communication mechanism for reviewers, rather than more
tags 590993 patch
thanks
It would be better if debian-cd was modified to only include the symlink
for the suite actually specified in the Release file.
The attached patch (tested) implements this.
diff --git a/tools/start_new_disc b/tools/start_new_disc
index cf00344..779f242 100755
---
tags 590993 patch
thanks
It would be better if debian-cd was modified to only include the symlink
for the suite actually specified in the Release file.
The attached patch (tested) implements this.
diff --git a/tools/start_new_disc b/tools/start_new_disc
index cf00344..779f242 100755
---
reassign 590993 debian-cd
severity 590993 normal
thanks
Since you are trying something that's not really supported, this is
certainly *not* a grave issue. After all, a CD image is not a mirror
even if both contain a repository.
It is correct that the error occurs because CD images have
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Steve Langasek]
Not only is apt-get now strong enough to handle the cases for which we
recommended aptitude in the sarge timeframe (with much better resolution
of upgrades, installation of Recommends by default, and tracking of
auto-installed packages), but
reassign 590993 debian-cd
severity 590993 normal
thanks
Since you are trying something that's not really supported, this is
certainly *not* a grave issue. After all, a CD image is not a mirror
even if both contain a repository.
It is correct that the error occurs because CD images have
reassign 590993 debian-cd
severity 590993 normal
thanks
Since you are trying something that's not really supported, this is
certainly *not* a grave issue. After all, a CD image is not a mirror
even if both contain a repository.
It is correct that the error occurs because CD images have
reassign 590993 debian-cd
severity 590993 normal
thanks
Since you are trying something that's not really supported, this is
certainly *not* a grave issue. After all, a CD image is not a mirror
even if both contain a repository.
It is correct that the error occurs because CD images have
On Thursday 22 July 2010, Ed Kohlwey wrote:
If I run this command from another machine on the LAN I get output from
grep showing Codename:squeeze, so its clear to me there's something
misconfigured or broken in d-i.
That's the wrong assumption. Assume there's something wrong in your setup
Basing on debcommit seems the only correct option to me. Possibly a
fallback to stripped epoch could be used to cover current cases.
Actually, the best solution is probably to simply rename the tags in SVN to
include the epoch using 'svn mv'.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Monday 19 July 2010, Otavio Salvador wrote:
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Christian PERRIER bubu...@debian.org
wrote:
The packages I released were tagged with the attached script,
contributed by Joey back in.a long time ago..:-)
Apparently, it does strip the epoch when
Steve M. Robbins wrote:
This is due to Debian Policy 2.5:
Packages must not depend on packages with lower priority values
(excluding build-time dependencies). In order to ensure this, the
priorities of one or more packages may need to be adjusted.
Why is this the policy? Why does it
Russ Allbery wrote:
[...] or between optional and extra, for *any* package?
I must admit that I've never seen the practical value of that distinction.
As to the rest of your message: it certainly seems worth discussing this in
a bit wider context.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
3. The 686 flavour is considered unsuitable for some AMD K7 processors
Problem 3 appears to be due to a workaround for an incorrect kernel
configuration. The comment on this exclusion is 'May not have SSE
support', but this has never been a
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
+ if grep -q '^flags.*\blm\b' $CPUINFO; then
Has this been tested with busybox shell?
Does busybox' grep understand '\b'? I don't recall us using it anywhere
else in D-I.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Sun, 2010-07-18 at 23:11 +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
+ if grep -q '^flags.*\blm\b' $CPUINFO; then
Has this been tested with busybox shell?
Does busybox' grep understand '\b'? I don't recall
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
3. The 686 flavour is considered unsuitable for some AMD K7 processors
Problem 3 appears to be due to a workaround for an incorrect kernel
configuration. The comment on this exclusion is 'May not have SSE
support', but this has never been a
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
+ if grep -q '^flags.*\blm\b' $CPUINFO; then
Has this been tested with busybox shell?
Does busybox' grep understand '\b'? I don't recall us using it anywhere
else in D-I.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Sun, 2010-07-18 at 23:11 +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
+ if grep -q '^flags.*\blm\b' $CPUINFO; then
Has this been tested with busybox shell?
Does busybox' grep understand '\b'? I don't recall
On Saturday 17 July 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
I eagerly await Bills view on the proposed change for
popularity-contest, which I believe i a better place to implement the
change.
No, it is not reasonable to ask packages to change functionally correct and
policy-compliant dependencies
(Daniel: sorry for the private duplicate of this mail; no need to CC me.)
On Saturday 17 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
On Sat, 2010 Jul 17 13:35+0200, Frans Pop wrote:
So: as the reported issue is already fixed in current daily built D-I
images and as the Recommends in popcon
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
On Sat, 2010 Jul 17 21:40+0200, Frans Pop wrote:
I'm not sure what image was used by the bug reporter, but I assume a
current D-I alpha 1 image. The alpha1 images date from mid Februari.
These received a refresh a few days ago:
http
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
So if I had used the one from
http://http.us.debian.org/debian/dists/sid/main/installer-amd64/current/
images/netboot/
it would have worked?
No. Those are *not* daily built images. Follow the relevant links from the
page I referred to! For
On Saturday 17 July 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
I eagerly await Bills view on the proposed change for
popularity-contest, which I believe i a better place to implement the
change.
No, it is not reasonable to ask packages to change functionally correct and
policy-compliant dependencies
On Saturday 17 July 2010, Christian PERRIER wrote:
I need to add such a file, but svn add apparently chokes on it:
bubu...@mykerinos:~/src/debian/debian-installer/installer/build/needed-c
haracters LC_ALL=C svn add s...@latin svn: warning: 'sr' not found
(Daniel: sorry for the private duplicate of this mail; no need to CC me.)
On Saturday 17 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
On Sat, 2010 Jul 17 13:35+0200, Frans Pop wrote:
So: as the reported issue is already fixed in current daily built D-I
images and as the Recommends in popcon
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
On Sat, 2010 Jul 17 21:40+0200, Frans Pop wrote:
I'm not sure what image was used by the bug reporter, but I assume a
current D-I alpha 1 image. The alpha1 images date from mid Februari.
These received a refresh a few days ago:
http
On Sunday 18 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
So if I had used the one from
http://http.us.debian.org/debian/dists/sid/main/installer-amd64/current/
images/netboot/
it would have worked?
No. Those are *not* daily built images. Follow the relevant links from the
page I referred to! For
Steve Langasek wrote:
This manual represents the opinion of a single developer.
And what does that have to do with the price of bananas in Iceland?
The fact that aptitude is currently the recommended tool for package
management has various reasons: user interface, features, dependency
Steve Langasek wrote:
This manual represents the opinion of a single developer.
And what does that have to do with the price of bananas in Iceland?
The fact that aptitude is currently the recommended tool for package
management has various reasons: user interface, features, dependency
Steve Langasek wrote:
This manual represents the opinion of a single developer.
And what does that have to do with the price of bananas in Iceland?
The fact that aptitude is currently the recommended tool for package
management has various reasons: user interface, features, dependency
tag 579954 pending
thanks
On Sunday 02 May 2010, Samuel Thibault wrote:
It has been reported that it would be useful to add a link from the
accessibility to the boot screen section, as the attached patch does,
since the latter describes precisely how keypresses work there.
I've added the
tag 580508 pending
thanks
On Thursday 06 May 2010, Samuel Thibault wrote:
The chapter numbers of the brltty manual have unfortunately changed.
The attached patch points at its index instead of directly to a chapter
number.
Updated. I've used a different patch as IMO the text where the URLs
On Thursday 15 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
From the looks of it, exim4 is installed because of a Recommends: by
the cron package:
Recommends: exim4 | postfix | mail-transport-agent, lockfile-progs
How exactly did you determine this? I doubt it is cron as Recommends are
not
On Thursday 15 July 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
I suspect the change you propose can not be implemented by
debian-installer, but instead would have to be done by changing cron
or any other package pulling in the mta package. At least the way d-i
is designed at the moment.
And on what do
On Friday 30 April 2010, Holger Wansing wrote:
Add 2010 to the copyright hint on the first side of the manual?
Copyright © 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 the Debian Installer team
Done.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe.
On Saturday 01 May 2010, Miroslav Kure wrote:
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 10:13:56AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
It's time for another upload of the Installation Guide.
Hi Frans, please consider applying the attached patch (or something
along the lines), which IMO greatly clarifies the IP adresses
tag 579954 pending
thanks
On Sunday 02 May 2010, Samuel Thibault wrote:
It has been reported that it would be useful to add a link from the
accessibility to the boot screen section, as the attached patch does,
since the latter describes precisely how keypresses work there.
I've added the
tag 580508 pending
thanks
On Thursday 06 May 2010, Samuel Thibault wrote:
The chapter numbers of the brltty manual have unfortunately changed.
The attached patch points at its index instead of directly to a chapter
number.
Updated. I've used a different patch as IMO the text where the URLs
On Thursday 15 July 2010, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
From the looks of it, exim4 is installed because of a Recommends: by
the cron package:
Recommends: exim4 | postfix | mail-transport-agent, lockfile-progs
How exactly did you determine this? I doubt it is cron as Recommends are
not
On Thursday 15 July 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
I suspect the change you propose can not be implemented by
debian-installer, but instead would have to be done by changing cron
or any other package pulling in the mta package. At least the way d-i
is designed at the moment.
And on what do
(Replying to list only.)
On Friday 16 July 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
Please make some effort to understand how things work before making
wild guesses.
I've spent an effort over several years to understand how d-i is
working, but thank you for voicing your concern.
For your
On Wednesday 14 July 2010, Christian PERRIER wrote:
OK, I'll add them to the packages_list file after we're done with the
beta1 release preparation.
Why wait?
This way, trnaslators can work on them and, if we happen to release a
beta2, or rc1, these packages will at least have some
On Wednesday 14 July 2010, Christian PERRIER wrote:
Quoting Frans Pop (elen...@planet.nl):
On Wednesday 14 July 2010, Christian PERRIER wrote:
OK, I'll add them to the packages_list file after we're done with
the beta1 release preparation.
Why wait?
Essentially to have time to cook
On Monday 12 July 2010, Bastian Blank wrote:
That was something I was looking
forward to fixing in the coming weeks.
This is just a rant, no useful information.
Actually, it was a compliment disguised as a joke! I had to read it twice
myself to get it
Dear Stephen,
On Monday 12 July 2010, Stephen Gran wrote:
Here's a nickel, kid, buy yourself a sense of humor. The entire message
was surrounded by giant blinking sarcasm tags.
Actually no, it wasn't. The only really clear clue was the last line.
The message was fairly long and especially
On Friday 09 July 2010, Steve McIntyre wrote:
True. Any better suggestions?
No. Not without doing substantial work on this, which I've already
indicated I'm not going to do this release.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
On Friday 09 July 2010, Ian Campbell wrote:
In light of Frans' concern perhaps consider dropping 686 instead of 486?
I think that will result in 686-bigmem being installed on systems which
would have previously got 686 (I can confirm if necessary). This isn't
necessarily a bad thing -- it
On Friday 09 July 2010, Steve McIntyre wrote:
What I've done for now is drop the -486 kernel flavour from the m-a
netinst. From a test build I've just done, everything fits on a single
CD again, even with firmware included. If people want to install from
a netinst onto a pre-686 machine then
On Friday 09 July 2010, Steve McIntyre wrote:
True. Any better suggestions?
No. Not without doing substantial work on this, which I've already
indicated I'm not going to do this release.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
On Friday 09 July 2010, Ian Campbell wrote:
In light of Frans' concern perhaps consider dropping 686 instead of 486?
I think that will result in 686-bigmem being installed on systems which
would have previously got 686 (I can confirm if necessary). This isn't
necessarily a bad thing -- it
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
5. Fix for real:
Edit /var/lib/dpkg/info/keyboard-configuration.config, and add the
following line in ask_debconf(), right before the if part, once all
choices have been merged together:
choices=`echo $choices | sed 's/,$//'`
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Frans Pop elen...@planet.nl (06/07/2010):
The proposed fix could well be OK, but maybe the code can be fixed a
bit earlier so the trailing comma is avoided in the first place?
Whatever unbreaks g-i.
Not really. There's also such things
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
DMs and DDs are maintainers and in some cases, DMs are also uploaders.
Debian Contributor seems nice enough, as Christoph Berg already
suggested.
So where would that leave translators, art people, etc, etc. Aren't
they contributing to? Contributors
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
I can't speak for the NM team, but if he was asked to go through DM
first (and that's what I understood), I could understand that his NM
application got removed for now.
This is the thing I'm having some problem with in the discussion so far.
Is
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Don Armstrong wrote:
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
Is it actually OK for FD to demand that candidates go through DM
before applying for DD, or as part of the NM process?
If the FD isn't fairly confident that someone has enough experience in
Debian to make
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Don Armstrong wrote:
The FD can say that someone isn't ready to enter the NM process,
though, and then provide specific suggestions as to how they can
demonstrate to the FD that they are ready to enter the NM process.
I'm not disagreeing with that. But that's a
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
5. Fix for real:
Edit /var/lib/dpkg/info/keyboard-configuration.config, and add the
following line in ask_debconf(), right before the if part, once all
choices have been merged together:
choices=`echo $choices | sed 's/,$//'`
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Frans Pop elen...@planet.nl (06/07/2010):
The proposed fix could well be OK, but maybe the code can be fixed a
bit earlier so the trailing comma is avoided in the first place?
Whatever unbreaks g-i.
Not really. There's also such things
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
5. Fix for real:
Edit /var/lib/dpkg/info/keyboard-configuration.config, and add the
following line in ask_debconf(), right before the if part, once all
choices have been merged together:
choices=`echo $choices | sed 's/,$//'`
On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Frans Pop elen...@planet.nl (06/07/2010):
The proposed fix could well be OK, but maybe the code can be fixed a
bit earlier so the trailing comma is avoided in the first place?
Whatever unbreaks g-i.
Not really. There's also such things
On Sunday 04 July 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
Looks so, I never expected that the two packages could get out of
sync.
Is there some way to get the udevadm settle command work also with
older udevd versions? Can the protocol be changed?
This is a D-I release management problem and
On Sunday 04 July 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
Looks so, I never expected that the two packages could get out of
sync.
Is there some way to get the udevadm settle command work also with
older udevd versions? Can the protocol be changed?
This is a D-I release management problem and
found 571939 0.6.3-2
thanks
I can still reliably reproduce this segfault.
Cheers,
FJP
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Tuesday 29 June 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
In Debian Edu, we automatically search for error: in the installation
log to detect errors during installation.
Then it seems you need to make an exception for this error.
When PXE installing, I get this one:
Jun 28 23:18:29
On Tuesday 29 June 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Frans Pop]
So, one wget results in a 404. As choose-mirror tries various
possible suites and codenames and wgets are used for other purposes
as well, a 404 is always a possibility.
Sure, but all the URLs listed in the log are working
On Tuesday 29 June 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
NACK. The errors are too useful to suppress.
I disagree. The error in question is almost useless. There is no way
to see which URL was missing, and the message show up in the wrong
location in the log. A useful error message would make
On Tuesday 29 June 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
In Debian Edu, we automatically search for error: in the installation
log to detect errors during installation.
Then it seems you need to make an exception for this error.
When PXE installing, I get this one:
Jun 28 23:18:29
On Tuesday 29 June 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Frans Pop]
So, one wget results in a 404. As choose-mirror tries various
possible suites and codenames and wgets are used for other purposes
as well, a 404 is always a possibility.
Sure, but all the URLs listed in the log are working
On Tuesday 29 June 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
NACK. The errors are too useful to suppress.
I disagree. The error in question is almost useless. There is no way
to see which URL was missing, and the message show up in the wrong
location in the log. A useful error message would make
On Monday 28 June 2010, Ramiro Alba Queipo wrote:
So, I would like to skip at stage 5, the following modules:
- base-installer
- user-setup
- apt-setup
- pkgsel
Is that possible?.
Create a custom udeb that runs before base-installer, does the rsync and
provides the udebs you want to
On Friday 25 June 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
I'm not sure I understand against *what* exactly you're arguing; nor it
is clear to me whether you are proposing a different course of action
than the status quo.
The vote is there and we cannot change the past [...]
I would welcome a new GR
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
* Otavio Salvador ota...@ossystems.com.br [2010-06-19 12:35]:
The following patch, which clears the cache after debootstrap and
then again at the end (after kernel/extra packages), works for me.
OK to apply?
Conceptually it is OK but
On Saturday 19 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
I see no reason for leaving .deb files in /var/cache/apt/archives on a
fresh installation, so let's run apt-get clean before reboot.
This has been suggested and discussed before. IIRC (but I may be mistaken)
Joey has always been against it.
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
The main reason IIRC is that leaving the packages makes it unnecessary
to download them again if part of e.g. tasksel fails for whatever reason
and the user has to install some packages manually [...].
Note that the above argument is only really valid
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
Any disk space savings are IMO illusionary as the cache will fill up
again anyway during later updates and any system that does not have
sufficient disk space to hold a decent package cache will also have
serious problems during later stable updates.
I
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Christian PERRIER wrote:
Maybe, for more corner cases where keepign the cache would be
good, could we have a low priority option (or a preseed-only choice)
to *not* clean the cache?
I don't think it has anything to do with user choice or preseeding. Making
this a
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Rick Thomas wrote:
If you are *very* short of disk space, doing it twice might make sense.
Nonsense. If you're that short on diskspace you have a totally unusable
system anyway.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[1] Checking installation of packages using apt-install is much
harder to do as there are many different calls and failure may be
expected in some cases. It also gains much less as their total size
is much less.
I believe it would not be
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
* Otavio Salvador ota...@ossystems.com.br [2010-06-19 12:35]:
The following patch, which clears the cache after debootstrap and
then again at the end (after kernel/extra packages), works for me.
OK to apply?
Conceptually it is OK but
On Saturday 19 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
I see no reason for leaving .deb files in /var/cache/apt/archives on a
fresh installation, so let's run apt-get clean before reboot.
This has been suggested and discussed before. IIRC (but I may be mistaken)
Joey has always been against it.
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
The main reason IIRC is that leaving the packages makes it unnecessary
to download them again if part of e.g. tasksel fails for whatever reason
and the user has to install some packages manually [...].
Note that the above argument is only really valid
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
Any disk space savings are IMO illusionary as the cache will fill up
again anyway during later updates and any system that does not have
sufficient disk space to hold a decent package cache will also have
serious problems during later stable updates.
I
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Christian PERRIER wrote:
Maybe, for more corner cases where keepign the cache would be
good, could we have a low priority option (or a preseed-only choice)
to *not* clean the cache?
I don't think it has anything to do with user choice or preseeding. Making
this a
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Rick Thomas wrote:
If you are *very* short of disk space, doing it twice might make sense.
Nonsense. If you're that short on diskspace you have a totally unusable
system anyway.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[1] Checking installation of packages using apt-install is much
harder to do as there are many different calls and failure may be
expected in some cases. It also gains much less as their total size
is much less.
I believe it would not be
On Saturday 19 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
cleanup () {
+ rm -f /target/var/cache/apt/archives/*.deb 2/dev/null || true
rm -f $KERNEL_LIST $KERNEL_LIST.unfiltered
}
Shouldn't this call 'apt-get cleanup' in /target instead?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Saturday 19 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
cleanup () {
+ rm -f /target/var/cache/apt/archives/*.deb 2/dev/null || true
rm -f $KERNEL_LIST $KERNEL_LIST.unfiltered
}
Shouldn't this call 'apt-get cleanup' in /target instead?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
1 - 100 of 18898 matches
Mail list logo
