Re: Problems with 1.2.1
Dale Scheetz <email@example.com> typed:
> On Thu, 9 Jan 1997, Richard Jones wrote:
> > Well a few problems were caused by me not deleting the old packages from the
> > tree when I had moved across new ones. Also a few problems were caused
> > by packages that had been fixed but hadn't reached my mirror at the time I
> > downloaded the whole lot.
> Having two versions of a package in an archive will give dselect fits, and
> it will usually not do "the right thing".
Yup it surely did..;)
> > Unfortunately I don't have time to do another fresh install, so unfortunately
> > due to the non-standard install method (which sounds like it was definately
> > part of the problem), all the data I collected on the install process is
> > pretty useless as far as putting in reliable bug reports goes :(...but maybe
> > someone else doing a fresh install the right way could use some of the notes
> > as a cross-reference for any probs they have.
> You should not need to start over at this point. From what I know about
> the distribution, most of the problems you have had, have to do with
> dependency infelicities in various packages. As far as I know, all of
> these can be dealt with on a package by package basis. You will find good
> support here for helping you through these rough spots. Learning to deal
> with the class of problems you are encountering will boost your
> confidence in the system and increase your ability to have some fun with
> this product.
Sorry, you misunderstood me, I managed to wade through the dependency problems
fairly quickly (most of them were the same as for 1.2). What I meant by no
time for a fresh install was that due to my broken upgrade method it was
difficult to tell which problem were my fault and which were the packages
fault, thus making accurate bug reports difficult. This could have only been
clarified by a fresh install which I had neither the time or space for (my box
is permanently net connected and thus I try to avoid downtime as much as
Another point made in the original post was that calling 1.2 (and 1.2.1)
stable seems to be one giant misnomer. They are installable if you have used
linux before and/or have access to the mailing list, but others not in these
groups would struggle (IMO). I haven't used the developement release but I
have a feeling it could be just as stable if not more so than the "stable"
releases, as many of the "unstable" packages released seem to be upstream
bug-fixes that dont go directly into stable for some reason, also many of
these dependency problems appear to be caused by packages being built on the
(hence depending on stuff like libraries that are not yet available on
"stable"), thus not always being fully compatable with the stable tree.
Thanks for response.
P.S. I *do* like debian and think its the most complete linux distribution out
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com