John Hasler wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uggh, they removed X4 from Woody? I'm not sure I like this testing
distribution thing. If I'm pointing at woody the whole time (which I
have), I don't expect packages to be rolled back unless something is
really wrong.
You wouldn't have
I'm trying to install lesstif-dev on my woody (testing) box. It says it
depends on xlib6g-dev but xlib6g-dev conflicts with xlibs which is already
installed and is required by other packages. I don't see an xlibs-dev
either. Where are the development packages for X (4.01) in woody now? Do
they
On 12-Jan-2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm trying to install lesstif-dev on my woody (testing) box. It says it
depends on xlib6g-dev but xlib6g-dev conflicts with xlibs which is already
installed and is required by other packages. I don't see an xlibs-dev
either. Where are the development
Uggh, they removed X4 from Woody? I'm not sure I like this testing
distribution thing. If I'm pointing at woody the whole time (which I
have), I don't expect packages to be rolled back unless something is
really wrong. So now that X has been removed from Woody, I must either
roll back to X3 also,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uggh, they removed X4 from Woody? I'm not sure I like this testing
distribution thing. If I'm pointing at woody the whole time (which I
have), I don't expect packages to be rolled back unless something is
really wrong.
When they implemented testing, they started
On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 12:58:39PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uggh, they removed X4 from Woody? I'm not sure I like this testing
distribution thing. If I'm pointing at woody the whole time (which I
have), I don't expect packages to be rolled back unless something is
really wrong. So now
On 12-Jan-2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uggh, they removed X4 from Woody? I'm not sure I like this testing
distribution thing. If I'm pointing at woody the whole time (which I
have), I don't expect packages to be rolled back unless something is
really wrong. So now that X has been removed
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uggh, they removed X4 from Woody? I'm not sure I like this testing
distribution thing. If I'm pointing at woody the whole time (which I
have), I don't expect packages to be rolled back unless something is
really wrong.
You wouldn't have these problems if you would
You contradict yourself - if you were tracking woody you were tracking
unstable. Since you were tracking unstable before I don't see why
it's such a big deal to track it now ...
Maybe it's not worth a discussion, but when I started using woody before,
the stability of this machine was much
You wouldn't have these problems if you would ignore the damn code names
and track the appropriate distribution. If you want to track unstable
point to unstable, not woody.
_Don't_ _use_ _code_ _names_.
But I did not want to track unstable, I wanted to track woody. That is, I
didn't want
debuser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DU So will testing always be available? I like the idea. I'm just not
DU used to packages being rolled back in a release. But if I have
DU apt-get always looking at testing, maybe that's what will make me
DU happy.
To my knowledge:
-- Testing will always be
On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 03:39:15PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You contradict yourself - if you were tracking woody you were tracking
unstable. Since you were tracking unstable before I don't see why
it's such a big deal to track it now ...
Maybe it's not worth a discussion, but when
On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 03:50:08PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You wouldn't have these problems if you would ignore the damn code names
and track the appropriate distribution. If you want to track unstable
point to unstable, not woody.
_Don't_ _use_ _code_ _names_.
But I did not
13 matches
Mail list logo
