On 2018-07-18, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>> I'm of the opinion we're all running different machines with
>>> different sets of software, and this explains that (could be wrong,
>>> though).
>> I was just -so- sure we all had the exact same installs.
>
> All joking aside: I've been maintaining about
>> I'm of the opinion we're all running different machines with
>> different sets of software, and this explains that (could be wrong,
>> though).
> I was just -so- sure we all had the exact same installs.
All joking aside: I've been maintaining about 4-5 Debian machines, all
using Debian testing
On 7/16/18 10:45 AM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
My suggestion is unless you are prepared to adopt and maintain lsb-base,
(as Didier has made clear he wants to orphan it), find an alternative
tool to achieve what you want.
I am already running my private lsb-base package for several months.
The
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 11:00:15PM +0300, Reco wrote:
LSB was more than that. It was a set of standards declaring what you can
find in your typical GNU/Linux system.
LSB was always somewhat controversial when one tried to apply it to any
non-rpm distribution (LSB mandated rpm as package
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 05:58:20PM +, Curt wrote:
> I'm of the opinion we're all running different machines with different sets of
> software, and this explains that (could be wrong, though).
I was just -so- sure we all had the exact same installs.
;D
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 3:45 AM Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 12:16:20PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
>
> >What is your suggestion here? Apply the patch I provided (or maybe a
> >better one), or get rid of lsb-base completely?
>
> My suggestion is unless you are prepared to
On 2018-07-16, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>
>> In this particular case the result of 'aptitude why' is misleading, to
>> say the least:
>>
>> $ aptitude why speech-dispatcher
>> i grub2Depends grub-common (= 2.02~beta3-5)
>> i A grub-common Suggests desktop-base (>= 4.0.6)
>> i A
On 07/16/2018 08:12 AM, Reco wrote:
Hi.
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 02:43:18PM +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 07:08:34AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
[...]
But it sheds light on this thread's original subject line.
It listed several packages [e.g.
On Mon 16 Jul 2018 at 07:15:25 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 07/16/2018 05:14 AM, Darac Marjal wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 10:57:32AM +0900, John Crawley wrote:
> > > On 2018-07-16 04:33, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > > > Can I a Debian user opt to not install "LSB" without ill effects?
>
Hi.
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 02:43:18PM +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 07:08:34AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > But it sheds light on this thread's original subject line.
> > It listed several packages [e.g. speech-dispatcher] for which I have
> >
On 07/16/2018 07:43 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 07:08:34AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
[...]
But it sheds light on this thread's original subject line.
It listed several packages [e.g. speech-dispatcher] for which I have
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 07:08:34AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
[...]
> But it sheds light on this thread's original subject line.
> It listed several packages [e.g. speech-dispatcher] for which I have
> no apparent need. It will be educational to
On 07/16/2018 05:14 AM, Darac Marjal wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 10:57:32AM +0900, John Crawley wrote:
On 2018-07-16 04:33, Richard Owlett wrote:
Can I a Debian user opt to not install "LSB" without ill effects?
Some ...er, many Debian packages depend on lsb-base.
'apt-cache rdepends
On 07/15/2018 08:57 PM, John Crawley wrote:
On 2018-07-16 04:33, Richard Owlett wrote:
Can I a Debian user opt to not install "LSB" without ill effects?
Some ...er, many Debian packages depend on lsb-base.
'apt-cache rdepends lsb-base' for a long list.
Interesting.
But it answers too broad
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 10:57:32AM +0900, John Crawley wrote:
On 2018-07-16 04:33, Richard Owlett wrote:
Can I a Debian user opt to not install "LSB" without ill effects?
Some ...er, many Debian packages depend on lsb-base.
'apt-cache rdepends lsb-base' for a long list.
Yes, but in that
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 12:16:20PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
would you mind to take a look at
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=888743
The fix is pretty easy. Whats really bugging me is that nobody
dares to touch the complex code of lsb-base. IMHO this is a clear
Hi Reco,
On 7/15/18 1:44 PM, Reco wrote:
Hi.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 12:16:20PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
Hi folks,
would you mind to take a look at
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=888743
The fix is pretty easy.
But does not address all the
On 2018-07-16 04:33, Richard Owlett wrote:
Can I a Debian user opt to not install "LSB" without ill effects?
Some ...er, many Debian packages depend on lsb-base.
'apt-cache rdepends lsb-base' for a long list.
--
John
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 02:33:02PM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
[...]
> Is it of any use to Debian _users_ who *ONLY* use official Debian
> repositories?
It is useful for someone who wants to write a program which shall
run on an LSB-compliant
Hi.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 02:33:02PM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > > What is your suggestion here? Apply the patch I provided (or maybe a
> > > better one), or get rid of lsb-base completely?
> >
> > Aim to ditch lsb-base in the long run.
> > For here and now I'd used something like
On 07/15/2018 06:44 AM, Reco wrote:
Hi.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 12:16:20PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
Hi folks,
would you mind to take a look at
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=888743
The fix is pretty easy.
But does not address all the cornercases, IMO.
Hi.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 12:16:20PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> would you mind to take a look at
>
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=888743
>
> The fix is pretty easy.
But does not address all the cornercases, IMO.
Consider, for instance, an
Hi folks,
would you mind to take a look at
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=888743
The fix is pretty easy. Whats really bugging me is that nobody
dares to touch the complex code of lsb-base. IMHO this is a clear
indication that Debian lost the blessed path other Unixes
23 matches
Mail list logo
