Hi,
I think you are just using bad MUA's. My mail user agent can
distinguish between closed lists *where all correspondents are
expected to be members, and open lists, where a respondent need not
be on the list itself; and allow me to explicitly set how I want to
respond.
Hi,
Bill == Bill Leach [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bill Manjo; I am interpreting what you are saying as meaning that
Bill _every time_ I run dselect, I have to choose hold (=) to prevent
Bill dselect from upgrading automagically. Now since I KNOW that
Bill this is not correct, ie: I frequently run
Hi,
You put unstable in dselects install list. You then proceeded
not to tell dslect to put ewverything on hold (as I have explained
earlier, this involves hitting = twice on the right line in dselect).
You then proceeded to install. Not currently being able to
read minds,
Hi,
Steve == Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve On Sun, May 17, 1998 at 05:07:12PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
Steve, I think you misunderstand what stable, unstable etc are.
Steve No, I am not. I am well aware of it means.
I think not. Unstable means expect glitches.
Steve
On 17 May 1998 18:26:36 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
You put unstable in dselects install list. You then proceeded
not to tell dslect to put ewverything on hold (as I have explained
earlier, this involves hitting = twice on the right line in dselect).
Which I didn't know I could
On 17 May 1998 18:37:35 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Steve On Sun, May 17, 1998 at 05:07:12PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
Steve, I think you misunderstand what stable, unstable etc are.
Steve No, I am not. I am well aware of it means.
I think not. Unstable means expect glitches.
On Mon, May 18, 1998 at 01:07:29AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
On 17 May 1998 18:37:35 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Well. Either you look at the help (and it is way less than 50
options), or you hire people to help. I'll offer you a 50%
discount since you use Debian, and I like Debian.
On Mon, 18 May 1998 18:46:06 +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
Steve, we read and we understand what you want. We have suggested ways
in which you can both (a) work around the lack of this feature now,
and (b) request that it be added in the future. But you don't listen
to our replies.
Incorrect.
Fine, be rude. At least post it to debian-user so we can all have
right of reply.
For the absolute last time -- there is nothing wrong with your suggestion.
Please submit it to the bug system. Nobody thinks there is a problem with
your suggestion. I do not think there is a problem with your
On Mon, May 18, 1998 at 01:57:12AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Now, if you want rude, Hamish, take a look at the replies I've gotten and
the messages I've send out just recently. That is beginning to be rude. But
if you think the above is rude, you had better get a thicker skin because
that
On Fri, 15 May 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
No, the reply I thought went to the list didn't because this list does
not correctly set the reply-to field.
Seems to me it sets it right... ie, it leaves it how the original
sender set it. Stepping on a user's header is a Bad Thing IMO.
--
To
On Mon, 18 May 1998 09:07:52 -0300 (ADT), Trevor Barrie wrote:
No, the reply I thought went to the list didn't because this list does
not correctly set the reply-to field.
Seems to me it sets it right... ie, it leaves it how the original
sender set it. Stepping on a user's header is a Bad
I'm afraid Ill have to drag out this again. Please read:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
On Mon, 18 May 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
On Mon, 18 May 1998 09:07:52 -0300 (ADT), Trevor Barrie wrote:
No, the reply I thought went to the list didn't because this list does
not
]
Scott Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathan E Norman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
M.C. Vernon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bill Leach
Those are the names of all the people that I have replied to in the
course of the dselect oddities thread. If I had
On Mon, 18 May 1998 09:00:43 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
On Mon, 18 May 1998 11:40:26 -0400 (EDT), Scott Ellis wrote:
I'm afraid Ill have to drag out this again. Please read:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
Read it, laughed at every point in it as every single part of it is
Manjo;
I am interpreting what you are saying as meaning that _every time_
I run dselect, I have to choose hold (=) to prevent dselect from
upgrading automagically. Now since I KNOW that this is not correct,
ie: I frequently run dselect and I do not 'rechoose' hold to prevent
updating what I
Steve, it is not unreasonable to want dselect (or apt) to be
configurable such that you can choose to have it not do anything that
you do not explicitely request it to do.
I have maintained a partial mirror of debian for quite some time now and
still would find it handy if dselect were to have a
On Sun, 17 May 1998 00:32:29 -0400, Bill Leach wrote:
Although I admit to now being in the If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
mode myself (while hamm is in frozen), I do not personally subscribe to
that philosophy. The 'pain' of delaying upgrading to repair bugs can be
considerable and
Steve, I think you misunderstand what stable, unstable etc are.
Let's consider slink, for example. It begins as unstable (eg it is
unstable now). Contrary to the name, this does not mean that it is
not stable -- it means that it isn't tested to be stable, and that
it is undergoing further
On Sun, May 17, 1998 at 05:07:12PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
Steve, I think you misunderstand what stable, unstable etc are.
No, I am not. I am well aware of it means.
If you want continued upgrading of your applications, then you should
track unstable -- currently slink. If you
No autoupdating? I don't see what the problem is here: why not use
dpkg? I upgrade all the time with only dpkg and I cannot imagine how
it could be improved.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is a somewhat incredulous discussion!
On Sun, May 17, 1998 at 12:26:47AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Yes, if you want to do it with dselect. No, if you do it with dpkg,
which is far easier.
According to whose standards? To me dselect is far easier because I
don't have to wade through
On Sat, 16 May 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
: On Sun, 17 May 1998 00:32:29 -0400, Bill Leach wrote:
:
: Although I admit to now being in the If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
: mode myself (while hamm is in frozen), I do not personally subscribe to
: that philosophy. The 'pain' of delaying upgrading
On Fri, May 15, 1998 at 10:59:33AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 1998 13:58:02 -0400 (EDT), Scott Ellis wrote:
Go to the select screen, hit 'o', go to the top of the updated packages
section (the header), hit '='. There, all the updated packages are on
hold.
My isn't that
Hi,
Steve == Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve On 15 May 1998 16:21:52 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
One can certainly put all new and all updated packages on
hold. There are not that many sections; so it *is* possible to put
ecerything on hold.
Steve Then ask yourself this, would
On 15 May 1998 22:41:03 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
One can certainly put all new and all updated packages on
hold. There are not that many sections; so it *is* possible to put
ecerything on hold.
Steve Then ask yourself this, would you put up with having to release
Steve all those
On Sat, 16 May 1998 10:40:23 +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
We are all volunteers here. Generally speaking, constructive criticism
is welcome -- unconstructive criticism just makes people leave the project.
Exactly. I have been giving constructive critism and in return I have
been getting a
Steve wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 1998 10:40:23 +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
We are all volunteers here. Generally speaking, constructive criticism
is welcome -- unconstructive criticism just makes people leave the project.
Exactly. I have been giving constructive critism and in return I
Hi,
Steve == Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve On Sat, 16 May 1998 10:40:23 +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
We are all volunteers here. Generally speaking, constructive
criticism is welcome -- unconstructive criticism just makes people
leave the project.
Steve Exactly. I have been
Hi,
Steve == Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve The beef is that you're arguing with me because the default
Steve happens to suit you and you don't see where the problem is with
Steve marking things to be held yet if the situation were reversed,
Steve where you would have to constantly
On 16 May 1998 00:22:29 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Steve Exactly. I have been giving constructive critism and in return
Steve I have been getting a flippant attitude of It isn't that many
Steve ketstrokes. In fact, one person has said that if the
Steve situation were reverse he(?)'d find it
On 16 May 1998 00:20:33 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Now, you have to mark packages you want to upgrade. Tell me
again, how reversing the default would be any different?
I add a new package. All of a sudden I have to mark that package (or
section) for hold again. I add another
Hi,
Steve == Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That happens not to be the case. If the reverse were true: that all
packages were held be default, and I had to do two ops to turn them
t be upgraded. I would do it. If I had to release them one by one,
that would be unacceptable.
Steve I
Hi,
Steve == Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve On 16 May 1998 00:20:33 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Now, you have to mark packages you want to upgrade. Tell me again,
how reversing the default would be any different?
Steve I add a new package. All of a sudden I have to mark that
Hi,
Yes. See, in the current system, I have to manually go and put
on hold all packages I do _not_ want updated. In the reverse system,
you have to go and manually mark alll packages you _do_ want updated
(whether new, or old packages you feel need updating).
These systems are
On Sat, 16 May 1998 10:40:23 +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
We are all volunteers here. Generally speaking, constructive criticism
is welcome -- unconstructive criticism just makes people leave the project.
Exactly. I have been giving constructive critism and in return I have
been
On Fri, May 15, 1998 at 09:32:48PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
The beef is that you're arguing with me because the default happens to
suit you and you don't see where the problem is with marking things to be
held yet if the situation were reversed, where you would have to constantly
mark
On Fri, May 15, 1998 at 09:34:22PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 1998 10:40:23 +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
We are all volunteers here. Generally speaking, constructive criticism
is welcome -- unconstructive criticism just makes people leave the project.
Exactly. I have been
Am I the only one who feels that dselect should not update packages
unless explicitly told to?
--
Steve C. Lamb | Opinions expressed by me are not my
http://www.calweb.com/~morpheus| employer's. They hired me for my
ICQ: 5107343 |
On Fri, 15 May 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
: Am I the only one who feels that dselect should not update packages
: unless explicitly told to?
Could you be more specific? I've never had dselect update a package if
I didn't want it to ... I place those packages on hold.
--
Nathan Norman
MidcoNet
Am I the only one who feels that dselect should not update packages
unless explicitly told to?
I think this function is good. Maybe it should ask first, but generally
having an auto-update is good. It means I can run it to install and leave
it running, knowing that it will update things as
On Fri, 15 May 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
: On Fri, 15 May 1998 10:56:44 -0500 (CDT), Nathan E Norman wrote:
:
: : Am I the only one who feels that dselect should not update packages
: : unless explicitly told to?
:
: Could you be more specific? I've never had dselect update a package if
: I
On Fri, 15 May 1998 11:04:55 -0500 (CDT), Nathan E Norman wrote:
But isn't that the point of a packaging system? This way, bug-fixes,
security fixes, etc. are integrated into the system simply by running
dselect every now and then. deselect *does* present you with a list of
what it's going to
On Fri, 15 May 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 1998 11:04:55 -0500 (CDT), Nathan E Norman wrote:
But isn't that the point of a packaging system? This way, bug-fixes,
security fixes, etc. are integrated into the system simply by running
dselect every now and then. deselect *does*
On Fri, 15 May 1998 13:58:02 -0400 (EDT), Scott Ellis wrote:
Go to the select screen, hit 'o', go to the top of the updated packages
section (the header), hit '='. There, all the updated packages are on
hold.
My isn't that obvious. Not.
That's what placing packages on hold is good for.
On Fri, 15 May 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
: On Fri, 15 May 1998 11:04:55 -0500 (CDT), Nathan E Norman wrote:
:
: But isn't that the point of a packaging system? This way, bug-fixes,
: security fixes, etc. are integrated into the system simply by running
: dselect every now and then. deselect
On Fri, 15 May 1998 13:04:56 -0500 (CDT), Nathan E Norman wrote:
Hmm. In the first mail I saw from you, you said:
: Am I the only one who feels that dselect should not update
: packages unless explicitly told to?
I didn't see any explanation there. Sorry about that.
No, the reply I
On Fri, May 15, 1998 at 08:45:45AM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
Am I the only one who feels that dselect should not update packages
unless explicitly told to?
No you are not alone. As someone suggested, this has shades of M$
taking control of one's machine. Someone else mentioned
Hi,
Steve == Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you want everything on hold, then place everything on hold :)
Steve That is not feesable for 2-300 packages.
Why not? It is not as if you have to put every package on hold
individually.
manoj
puzzled
--
Enough research
On 15 May 1998 13:24:33 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Why not? It is not as if you have to put every package on hold
individually.
Because I wasn't aware that I could put sections on hold. However, as
someone has said, it is not possible to place everything on hold. Also, when
Hi,
Steve == Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve That is what a nice, simple command line parameter or
Steve configuration would be good for, we'd both have out default
Steve behavior, now wouldn't we?
Patches shall probably be gratefully accepted.
manoj
--
Experience
Hi,
Steve == Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve Because I wasn't aware that I could put sections on hold.
Hmm. Everytime I use the arrow keys to go up and down dselect,
and pass over the section line, it tells me :
On 15 May 1998 16:21:52 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
One can certainly put all new and all updated packages on
hold. There are not that many sections; so it *is* possible to put
ecerything on hold.
Then ask yourself this, would you put up with having to release all those
packages
53 matches
Mail list logo
