Re: Apt is cool (yay!) - What about bo?

1998-05-06 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On 5 May 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > I also experimented with a veruy wide xterm, and doscovered > that apt truncates the status line ;-( (I personally would not mind > a wrapped line, or a long line, so I know what is going on rather > than 'Waiting to coneect to blah.blah.blah.bla

Re: Apt is cool (yay!) - What about bo?

1998-05-06 Thread Manoj Srivastava
Hi, I also experimented with a veruy wide xterm, and doscovered that apt truncates the status line ;-( (I personally would not mind a wrapped line, or a long line, so I know what is going on rather than 'Waiting to coneect to blah.blah.blah.blah (122.122.122.122)'. Not that I am compl

Re: Apt is cool (yay!) - What about bo?

1998-05-06 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Tue, 5 May 1998, Joost Kooij wrote: > I love the staus display too. It is a bit "jumpy" though, maybe you want > to printf the numbers etc. in a fixed-size field. Oh, and an expected TOA > per package would be a nice finishing touch (I'm getting carried away I > guess ;-). I was thinking of r

Re: Apt is cool (yay!) - What about bo?

1998-05-05 Thread Joost Kooij
On Mon, 4 May 1998, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Mon, 4 May 1998, Jules Bean wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > Just installed apt_0.0.8. My impression is that it is significantly faster > > than dpkg-ftp. Could be pyschological, though ;) > > No, it probably is. It advoids alot of the time consuming st

Re: Apt is cool (yay!) - What about bo?

1998-05-04 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Mon, 4 May 1998, Jules Bean wrote: > Hi! > > Just installed apt_0.0.8. My impression is that it is significantly faster > than dpkg-ftp. Could be pyschological, though ;) No, it probably is. It advoids alot of the time consuming steps, read the status file faster, and with HTTP downloads f

Re: Apt is cool (yay!) - What about bo?

1998-05-04 Thread Jules Bean
--On Mon, May 4, 1998 3:39 pm +0100 "James Troup" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Jules Bean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Should the first two have been "Replaces: "'ed by their successors? > > Package: timezones > [...] > Conflicts: timezone > Replaces: timezone > > Package: locales > [...

Re: Apt is cool (yay!) - What about bo?

1998-05-04 Thread Jules Bean
--On Mon, May 4, 1998 6:38 am -0700 "Joel Klecker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 12:24 +0100 1998-05-04, Jules Bean wrote: >>The following packages on my system are in bo but not in hamm: >> >>--- Obsolete and local packages present on system --- >>- Obsolete/local Required packages

Re: Apt is cool (yay!) - What about bo?

1998-05-04 Thread Joel Klecker
At 12:24 +0100 1998-05-04, Jules Bean wrote: >The following packages on my system are in bo but not in hamm: > >--- Obsolete and local packages present on system --- >- Obsolete/local Required packages - >--- Obsolete/local Required packages in section base --- > *** Req

Apt is cool (yay!) - What about bo?

1998-05-04 Thread Jules Bean
Hi! Just installed apt_0.0.8. My impression is that it is significantly faster than dpkg-ftp. Could be pyschological, though ;) The default apt sources.list doesn't include a reference to bo - and in any case, since we're undergoing a symlink transition, I haven't been had bo in my dselect for