Le samedi 02 septembre 2023 à 23:47 +0200, Preuße, Hilmar a écrit :
> Control: block -1 by 1050807
>
> On 02.09.2023 07:57, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > *** Reporter, please consider answering these questions, where
> > appropriate ***
> >
&g
Package: libreoffice
Version: 1:7.2.4-3
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
* What led up to the situation?
A routine update of Debian testing (bookworm) on Jan 2, 2021 led to a situation
where clicking on LibreOffice's or LibreOffice apps' icons is ineffective ;
y
missing dependency, and that this plan would be useful to a lot of
people.
Thanks in advance !
--
Emmanuel Charpentier
Package: latexdiff
Version: 1.1.1-2
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
Dear Maintainer,
*** Reporter, please consider answering these questions, where appropriate ***
* What led up to the situation?
Trying to use latexdiff-git, I got :
$ latexdiff-git -r HEAD~1
Package: libreoffice-dev
Version: 1:5.0.2-1
Severity: critical
Justification: breaks unrelated software
Dear Maintainer,
* What led up to the situation?
apt-get update # Then
apt-get dist-upgrade -u -f
results in a hung apt-get. From another terminal, ps axfw says :
[ ... ]
3143 pts/0
Package: zotero-standalone
Version: 4.0.26.2-1
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
Dear Maintainer,
* What led up to the situation?
Attempt to use zotero standalone in conjunction with Chromium.
I alredy attemped this in the past, but went back to Iceweasel and Zotero for
Package: firmware-linux
Version: 0.41
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
Dear Maintainer,
*** Reporter, please consider answering these questions, where appropriate ***
* What led up to the situation?
Trying to purge and reinstall firmwares after my boot being messed up
Package: maxima
Version: 5.30.0-4
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
Dear Maintainer,
* What led up to the situation?
Following testing...
* What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or
ineffective)?
Le lundi 18 avril 2011 à 05:31 +0200, Marco d'Itri a écrit :
On Apr 17, Emmanuel Charpentier emm.charpent...@free.fr wrote:
FYI, what I got installed via netinst was udev 671-1.
167-1 *is* buggy *if* you have /run.
Currently you are not supposed to have /run on testing sistem, so
rm -rf
is highly annoying, and will annoy a lot of people now that it
has found its way in testing : many of us peones tend to install testing
rather than the (almost always outdated) stable distribution.
HTH,
Emmanuel Charpentier
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian
Package: fwbuilder
Version: 4.1.0-1
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
libfwbuilder-4.1.0-1 depends on libflwbuilder-abi-4.1.0, which is a virtual
package provided by libfwbuilder9.
On a testing system, installing libfwbuilder9-4.1.1-1 is *not* recognized as
providing the
.
Can someone suggest a workaround for squeeze users ? (No, I'd rather
*not* go for unstable. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt...).
Sincerely,
Emmanuel Charpentier
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject
I tried to build this kernel on a newer PIV. This dos *not* build with
gcc 4.0 or gcc 3.4, but *does* build with gcc 3.3
I'll try this on the target machine, and let you know.
--
Emmanuel Charpentier[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
13 matches
Mail list logo
