[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: upgrade to a lib in testing



Hi. I don't seem to have it right. I get an error on 'apt-get install
libsdl1.1-dev':

    Reading Package Lists...
    Building Dependency Tree...
    E: Couldn't find package libsdl1.1-dev

Here's my sources.list:

    deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free
    deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib
non-free
    deb http://security.debian.org stable/updates main contrib non-free
    deb-src http://http.us.debian.org/debian testing main contrib non-free
    deb http://linuxvideo.org/oms/data/debian ./

I'm also trying to 'apt-get install oms'. That says it won't install as a
one line because of other dependencies. How do I indicate it should pull
those, too?

Is there a way I can see all this in dselect so that I can interactively
check dependencies?

Thanks!

Robin

----- Original Message -----
From: "Adrian Bunk" <bunk@fs.tum.de>
To: "Robin Rowe" <rower@movieeditor.com>
Cc: "Debian Users" <debian-user@lists.debian.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2001 2:56 AM
Subject: Re: How to upgrade to a tested lib?


> On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Robin Rowe wrote:
>
> > I have some apps I want to build that require newer libs than what I
have
> > installed from stable. How do I tell dselect/apt/dpkg to let me pick the
> > newer SDL lib (for instance) out of tested, bring with it any dependent
libs
> > (which may also be in tested), but not make a change to newer packages
> > across the board?
>
> Add the following to your /etc/apt/sources.list:
>
> deb-src ftp://ftp.xxx.debian.org/debian testing main contrib non-free
>
> (replace the "xxx" with the country code for your latest mirror, e.g. I
> use "de")
>
>
> then do an
>   apt-get install libsdl1.1-dev
>
>
> > Related question, if I did want to upgrade across the board to woody,
how
> > would I do that?
>
>   apt-get -u dist-upgrade
>
>
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Robin
>
> cu,
> Adrian
>
> --
>
> Nicht weil die Dinge schwierig sind wagen wir sie nicht,
> sondern weil wir sie nicht wagen sind sie schwierig.




Reply to: