Re: firebird woody backport
--- ScruLoose <scruloose+debuser@eastlink.ca> wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> After visiting mozilla.org recently, I got kind of
> keen to try
> firebird, so I checked apt-get.org for a backport,
> and found a couple
> of sources there; the problem is that they want to
> beat the crap out of
> my system for their dependencies:
>
> deb
>
http://people.debian.org/~nobse/debian/woody/backported
> ./
> wants to remove 71 packages, including abiword,
> kde-base, and modconf
> wants to upgrade about a dozen packages, including
> debconf, gcc, and
> xfree86-common...
>
> I thought the whole point of backports was to
> *avoid* having to upgrade
> my whole system in order to install one package. Is
> there something I
> should know about what's going on here, or is this a
> broken backport?
>
> Both
> deb http://debian.netfarm.it/experimental/ woody
> sherpya/
> and
> deb http://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~sdier/debian
> updates/wup/
> croak as soon as I do an aptitude (or apt-get)
> update, giving this
> error:
>
> W: Couldn't stat source package list
> <URL snipped>
> - stat (2 No such file or directory)
> W: You may want to update the package lists to
> correct these missing
> files
>
> So... any ideas whether there's something I should
> be doing to make
> these backports work, or whether I should be trying
> to compile firebird
> myself...
> And if the latter, this would be my first attempt at
> compiling from
> source: is it feasible or would I be getting into a
> huge complex
> project?
>
> Thanks for any ideas
> --
>
This is not really a reply to your question but, I
just use their binary - I didn't have much luck
compiling firebird myself, after building, the browser
starts registering some components or something and
than it breaks :-s
HTH,
Joris
=====
--
Life is both difficult and tim consuming.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Reply to: