Re: Debian Lists, USENET & Spam
on Tue, 08 Jan 2002 12:33:55AM +0100, marTin insinuated:
> that's the problem with apt in potato, it can't pin. do you still
> have that debian.madduck.net line in /etc/apt/source.list? i could
> offer a kernel update and the package compiled and ready for
> potato...
yup, still there. that could be cool ...
> > and why should it try to REMOVE gmp, gnucash, wmakerconf, xmms,
> > xscreensaver, and all those?? not wanting to trash all those and have
> > to re-install them, i hit 'no'.
>
> you are doing apt-get upgrade and it tries to upgrade to woody.
no, i'm not. i'm doing apt-get upDATE and then apt-get install ...
it's not like it tries to remove the old gimp, and then install the
new one, or like the old gimp would prevent spamasssassin from working
...
> if you want to do that, do apt-get -u dist-upgrade, but if you
> don't, remove the testing lines from sources.list again and do an
> apt-get update.
if i remove the testing lines, i won't be able to get spamassassin
through apt-get, since it's only available for testing and unstable,
the point which led to this thread. should i just conclude that i am
unable to get spamassassin through apt-get while i am running potato?
> > well, ignoring the fact that i have no idea how to dpkg-buildpackage
>
> get the source, cd into the dir, do
>
> dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot
>
> and sit back.
getting the source involves typing
%apt-get source spamassassin
, right? if not, how do i get it? if yes, the output is still as
nasty as before (well, not *quite* as, since i removed a few of the
bad lines, but still the same idea).
> well, did you apt-get update all the way through?
yes. religiously.
> security.debian.org has no testing entries. make that stable. afaik...
[...]
> adrian doesn't have woody there either (yet). make that potato.
[...]
> and i think you can safely remove those two...
done. still no results.
> kernels? why kernels? releases... the kernel is *absoultely*
> independent. the kernel is Linux, the rest is Debian. woody is Debian
> and can be run with any kernel, 1.x, 2.0, 2.2, and 2.4...
all right, my confusion. i mean releases. what are different
kernels, then?
> i'll show you how if and only if you are going to become a responsible
> debian maintainer!
:-P cross my heart. i'd love a tutorial.
thanks again,
</nori>
<nori@sccs.swarthmore.edu>--------------------------------------------------
-------------------------http://www.sccs.swarthmore.edu/~nori/jnl/daily.html
Reply to: