Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
compiling a Debian package
64 views
Skip to first unread message
lee
Oct 28, 2012, 12:20:01 AM10/28/12
to
Hi,
is it a bug that should be reported when a source package doesn't
compile? And how come that there is a binary package though it cannot
be compiled?
apt-get build-dep dvbcut
apt-get source dvbcut
cd dvbcut
debuild -us -uc
... fails with a number of errors:
[...]
lavfmuxer.cpp: In constructor ‘lavfmuxer::lavfmuxer(const char*, uint32_t, mpgfile&, const char*)’:
lavfmuxer.cpp:46:9: error: ‘AVFormatContext’ has no member named ‘preload’
lavfmuxer.cpp:48:9: error: ‘AVFormatContext’ has no member named ‘mux_rate’
[...]
lavfmuxer.cpp:118:36: error: ‘av_set_parameters’ was not declared in this scope
lavfmuxer.cpp:118:109: error: ‘URL_WRONLY’ was not declared in this scope
lavfmuxer.cpp:118:119: error: ‘url_fopen’ was not declared in this scope
lavfmuxer.cpp:123:9: error: ‘AVFormatContext’ has no member named ‘preload’
lavfmuxer.cpp:125:9: error: ‘AVFormatContext’ has no member named ‘mux_rate’
lavfmuxer.cpp:128:35: error: ‘dump_format’ was not declared in this scope
lavfmuxer.cpp:130:23: error: ‘av_write_header’ was not declared in this scope
lavfmuxer.cpp: In destructor ‘virtual lavfmuxer::~lavfmuxer()’:
lavfmuxer.cpp:141:28: error: ‘url_fclose’ was not declared in this scope
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/878varp...@yun.yagibdah.de
is it a bug that should be reported when a source package doesn't
compile? And how come that there is a binary package though it cannot
be compiled?
apt-get build-dep dvbcut
apt-get source dvbcut
cd dvbcut
debuild -us -uc
... fails with a number of errors:
[...]
lavfmuxer.cpp: In constructor ‘lavfmuxer::lavfmuxer(const char*, uint32_t, mpgfile&, const char*)’:
lavfmuxer.cpp:46:9: error: ‘AVFormatContext’ has no member named ‘preload’
lavfmuxer.cpp:48:9: error: ‘AVFormatContext’ has no member named ‘mux_rate’
[...]
lavfmuxer.cpp:118:36: error: ‘av_set_parameters’ was not declared in this scope
lavfmuxer.cpp:118:109: error: ‘URL_WRONLY’ was not declared in this scope
lavfmuxer.cpp:118:119: error: ‘url_fopen’ was not declared in this scope
lavfmuxer.cpp:123:9: error: ‘AVFormatContext’ has no member named ‘preload’
lavfmuxer.cpp:125:9: error: ‘AVFormatContext’ has no member named ‘mux_rate’
lavfmuxer.cpp:128:35: error: ‘dump_format’ was not declared in this scope
lavfmuxer.cpp:130:23: error: ‘av_write_header’ was not declared in this scope
lavfmuxer.cpp: In destructor ‘virtual lavfmuxer::~lavfmuxer()’:
lavfmuxer.cpp:141:28: error: ‘url_fclose’ was not declared in this scope
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/878varp...@yun.yagibdah.de
Kumar Appaiah
Oct 28, 2012, 1:40:02 AM10/28/12
to
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 05:18:14AM +0100, lee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is it a bug that should be reported when a source package doesn't
> compile? And how come that there is a binary package though it cannot
> be compiled?
>
>
> apt-get build-dep dvbcut
> apt-get source dvbcut
> cd dvbcut
> debuild -us -uc
>
>
> ... fails with a number of errors:
It depends. Which version of the compiler and libraries do you have
> Hi,
>
> is it a bug that should be reported when a source package doesn't
> compile? And how come that there is a binary package though it cannot
> be compiled?
>
>
> apt-get build-dep dvbcut
> apt-get source dvbcut
> cd dvbcut
> debuild -us -uc
>
>
> ... fails with a number of errors:
installed, and which version was used on the buildd? And is the
current version buildable in sid and wheezy? If so, it's may not be a
release critical bug, although it may still be a bug.
Please check these details (versions of packages, compiler etc.).
HTH.
Kumar
--
I've no idea when Linus is going to release 2.0.24, but if he takes
too long Im going to release a 2.0.24unoff and he can sound off all
he likes.
-- Alan Cox
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Andrei POPESCU
Oct 28, 2012, 5:50:02 AM10/28/12
to
On Du, 28 oct 12, 05:18:14, lee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is it a bug that should be reported when a source package doesn't
> compile?
Yes, but only if you can prove it is not due to a problem in your build
> Hi,
>
> is it a bug that should be reported when a source package doesn't
> compile?
environment. You could post console output here.
> And how come that there is a binary package though it cannot
> be compiled?
very different to yours.
Kind regards,
Andrei
--
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
Andrei POPESCU
Oct 28, 2012, 6:10:01 AM10/28/12
to
On Du, 28 oct 12, 11:44:57, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>
> Yes, but only if you can prove it is not due to a problem in your build
> environment. You could post console output here.
I meant "more". For example the output of the 'configure' step could be
>
> Yes, but only if you can prove it is not due to a problem in your build
> environment. You could post console output here.
useful.
John Hasler
Oct 28, 2012, 9:00:02 AM10/28/12
to
Andrei POPESCU writes:
> Yes, but only if you can prove it is not due to a problem in your
> build environment. You could post console output here.
"apt-get build-dep" should establish the required environment.
> Yes, but only if you can prove it is not due to a problem in your
> build environment. You could post console output here.
> Debian packages are built in controlled minimal environments that may
> be very different to yours.
have on his machine. In any case any package that won't build when it's
build dependencies are satisfied is buggy. Our users should be able to
compile their own software following the instructions we give them.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
John Hasler
Oct 28, 2012, 9:30:01 AM10/28/12
to
lee writes:
> is it a bug that should be reported when a source package doesn't
> compile?
Yes.
> is it a bug that should be reported when a source package doesn't
> compile?
> And how come that there is a binary package though it cannot be
> compiled?
one or more of the dependencies is not sufficiently strict.
I assume you mean "cd dvbcut-0.5.4+svn178". The build fails here as
well. File a FTBS bug.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Oct 28, 2012, 1:20:03 PM10/28/12
to
John Hasler <jha...@newsguy.com> writes:
> lee writes:
>> is it a bug that should be reported when a source package doesn't
>> compile?
>
> Yes.
>
>> And how come that there is a binary package though it cannot be
>> compiled?
>
> It compiled on the developer's machine and on the buildds. Most likely
> one or more of the dependencies is not sufficiently strict.
>
> I assume you mean "cd dvbcut-0.5.4+svn178". The build fails here as
> well. File a FTBS bug.
Thank you for trying! Yes, I have the same version here. I've sent a
> lee writes:
>> is it a bug that should be reported when a source package doesn't
>> compile?
>
> Yes.
>
>> And how come that there is a binary package though it cannot be
>> compiled?
>
> It compiled on the developer's machine and on the buildds. Most likely
> one or more of the dependencies is not sufficiently strict.
>
> I assume you mean "cd dvbcut-0.5.4+svn178". The build fails here as
> well. File a FTBS bug.
bug report, see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=691682
Do you have packages from dmo installed? It seems as if that may cause
the problem.
Since I only wanted to see if compiling it with "-march=native" makes a
difference, it doesn't really matter. If I could compile cinelerra or
had an alternative for that, I could remove the dmo packages again ...
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ip9uo...@yun.yagibdah.de
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
John Hasler
Oct 28, 2012, 1:40:01 PM10/28/12
to
lee writes:
> Do you have packages from dmo installed?
No. I have no need for them. I just compiled dvbcut to check out the
> Do you have packages from dmo installed?
bug. I've already deleted it.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Andrei POPESCU
Oct 28, 2012, 5:20:01 PM10/28/12
to
On Du, 28 oct 12, 07:51:17, John Hasler wrote:
> Andrei POPESCU writes:
> > Yes, but only if you can prove it is not due to a problem in your
> > build environment. You could post console output here.
>
> "apt-get build-dep" should establish the required environment.
Assuming a pure Debian environment. As it turns out the OP does have
> Andrei POPESCU writes:
> > Yes, but only if you can prove it is not due to a problem in your
> > build environment. You could post console output here.
>
> "apt-get build-dep" should establish the required environment.
foreign libraries installed. I'm predicting that unless he can prove the
bug exists with Debian libraries as well his bug will be closed.
John Hasler
Oct 28, 2012, 6:00:02 PM10/28/12
to
I wrote:
> "apt-get build-dep" should establish the required environment.
> "apt-get build-dep" should establish the required environment.
Andrei writes:
> Assuming a pure Debian environment. As it turns out the OP does have
> foreign libraries installed.
I don't.
> Assuming a pure Debian environment. As it turns out the OP does have
> foreign libraries installed.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87hapei...@thumper.dhh.gt.org
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Oct 29, 2012, 5:10:03 PM10/29/12
to
John Hasler <jha...@newsguy.com> writes:
> I wrote:
>> "apt-get build-dep" should establish the required environment.
>
> Andrei writes:
>> Assuming a pure Debian environment. As it turns out the OP does have
>> foreign libraries installed.
>
> I don't.
Then you would have to send the bug report: It was closed because I have
> I wrote:
>> "apt-get build-dep" should establish the required environment.
>
> Andrei writes:
>> Assuming a pure Debian environment. As it turns out the OP does have
>> foreign libraries installed.
>
> I don't.
those libs from dmo installed, and dmo is deprecated.
They shouldn't deprecate a valuable repository before they have a
replacement. First they remove 32bit support, now they remove
multimedia support (or the other way round). Debian turns more and more
into a jail :( What will they remove next? It's time to move on to
something else.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87liepl...@yun.yagibdah.de
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Tom H
Oct 29, 2012, 6:50:02 PM10/29/12
to
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:24 AM, lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de> wrote:
> John Hasler <jha...@newsguy.com> writes:
>> I wrote:
> John Hasler <jha...@newsguy.com> writes:
>> I wrote:
>> Andrei writes:
>>>
>>> "apt-get build-dep" should establish the required environment.
>>>
>>> "apt-get build-dep" should establish the required environment.
>>> Assuming a pure Debian environment. As it turns out the OP does have
>>> foreign libraries installed.
>>
>> I don't.
>
> Then you would have to send the bug report: It was closed because I have
> those libs from dmo installed, and dmo is deprecated.
>
> They shouldn't deprecate a valuable repository before they have a
> replacement. First they remove 32bit support, now they remove
> multimedia support (or the other way round). Debian turns more and more
> into a jail :( What will they remove next?
http://www.debian-multimedia.org
>>> foreign libraries installed.
>>
>> I don't.
>
> Then you would have to send the bug report: It was closed because I have
> those libs from dmo installed, and dmo is deprecated.
>
> They shouldn't deprecate a valuable repository before they have a
> replacement. First they remove 32bit support, now they remove
> multimedia support (or the other way round). Debian turns more and more
> into a jail :( What will they remove next?
has been moved to
http://www.deb-multimedia.org
Andrei called d-m.o deprecated because, AFAIK, most of the packages in
d-m.o are now available in d.o.
(What do you mean by "remove 32bit support"?)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Andrei POPESCU
Oct 30, 2012, 8:00:02 AM10/30/12
to
On Lu, 29 oct 12, 18:42:46, Tom H wrote:
>
> Andrei called d-m.o deprecated because, AFAIK, most of the packages in
> d-m.o are now available in d.o.
I don't remember doing that...
>
> Andrei called d-m.o deprecated because, AFAIK, most of the packages in
> d-m.o are now available in d.o.
> (What do you mean by "remove 32bit support"?)
architecture) will go away before the release of Jessie and even
afterwards, it will probably stay around as a "partial architecture",
which is a possibility introduced by multiarch.
Support for 32 bit in general will probably stay around even longer, ARM
and MIPS are just getting 64 bit support.
Tom H
Oct 30, 2012, 10:40:02 AM10/30/12
to
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Andrei POPESCU
<andreim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Lu, 29 oct 12, 18:42:46, Tom H wrote:
>> Andrei called d-m.o deprecated because, AFAIK, most of the packages in
>> d-m.o are now available in d.o.
>
> I don't remember doing that...
I'm sorry. I could've sworn that I'd a post of yours to that effect
<andreim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Lu, 29 oct 12, 18:42:46, Tom H wrote:
>> Andrei called d-m.o deprecated because, AFAIK, most of the packages in
>> d-m.o are now available in d.o.
>
> I don't remember doing that...
but I've just read through the archive and found nada. I was
hallucinating! Sorry again.
>> (What do you mean by "remove 32bit support"?)
>
> Don't worry, it's just FUD.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Oct 30, 2012, 4:30:01 PM10/30/12
to
Tom H <tomh...@gmail.com> writes:
> Thanks. I'm not worried. I was just curious what Lee's misunderstanding was...
It's not my misunderstanding. Since a while, 32bit support is gone with
> Thanks. I'm not worried. I was just curious what Lee's misunderstanding was...
no way to get it back, and if I didn't have a 64bit alternative that
half-way works, I wouldn't have Debian anymore.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87625ry...@yun.yagibdah.de
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Oct 30, 2012, 4:30:02 PM10/30/12
to
Andrei POPESCU <andreim...@gmail.com> writes:
> Don't worry, it's just FUD. It's unlikely that i386 (as in the Debian
> architecture) will go away before the release of Jessie and even
> afterwards, it will probably stay around as a "partial architecture",
> which is a possibility introduced by multiarch.
>
> Support for 32 bit in general will probably stay around even longer, ARM
> and MIPS are just getting 64 bit support.
You're ignoring that you cannot run 32bit apps on amd64 anymore ---
> Don't worry, it's just FUD. It's unlikely that i386 (as in the Debian
> architecture) will go away before the release of Jessie and even
> afterwards, it will probably stay around as a "partial architecture",
> which is a possibility introduced by multiarch.
>
> Support for 32 bit in general will probably stay around even longer, ARM
> and MIPS are just getting 64 bit support.
support for that has been removed and they want to force users to switch
to brokenarch which doesn't work.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87a9v3y...@yun.yagibdah.de
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Oct 30, 2012, 4:30:03 PM10/30/12
to
Tom H <tomh...@gmail.com> writes:
> Andrei called d-m.o deprecated because, AFAIK, most of the packages in
> d-m.o are now available in d.o.
Cinelerra is not in Debian, and I haven't been able to compile it, so
> Andrei called d-m.o deprecated because, AFAIK, most of the packages in
> d-m.o are now available in d.o.
the only source for it is dmo. You can't even watch a DVD with what's
in Debian.
> (What do you mean by "remove 32bit support"?)
was an update and it doesn't work anymore since then. There isn't a
fix, either, it's just not supported anymore. It might work again in a
year or two perhaps, or perhaps not. If you know how to fix it, let me
know.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ehkfy...@yun.yagibdah.de
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Andrei POPESCU
Oct 30, 2012, 7:00:02 PM10/30/12
to
On Ma, 30 oct 12, 21:23:48, lee wrote:
> Tom H <tomh...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Thanks. I'm not worried. I was just curious what Lee's misunderstanding was...
>
> It's not my misunderstanding. Since a while, 32bit support is gone with
> no way to get it back, and if I didn't have a 64bit alternative that
> half-way works, I wouldn't have Debian anymore.
Right...
> Tom H <tomh...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Thanks. I'm not worried. I was just curious what Lee's misunderstanding was...
>
> It's not my misunderstanding. Since a while, 32bit support is gone with
> no way to get it back, and if I didn't have a 64bit alternative that
> half-way works, I wouldn't have Debian anymore.
$ uname -a
Linux think 3.2.0-4-rt-686-pae #1 SMP PREEMPT RT Debian 3.2.32-1 i686 GNU/Linux
$ dpkg --print-architecture
i386
Andrei POPESCU
Oct 30, 2012, 7:10:02 PM10/30/12
to
On Ma, 30 oct 12, 21:09:51, lee wrote:
>
> You're ignoring that you cannot run 32bit apps on amd64 anymore ---
> support for that has been removed and they want to force users to switch
> to brokenarch which doesn't work.
Firstly, you could have specified that instead of broad statements like
>
> You're ignoring that you cannot run 32bit apps on amd64 anymore ---
> support for that has been removed and they want to force users to switch
> to brokenarch which doesn't work.
"32 bit support has been removed from Debian". Debian is much more than
the amd64 architecture.
Secondly, so far you have not provided any evidence to this.
Chris Bannister
Oct 30, 2012, 9:20:02 PM10/30/12
to
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 09:06:37PM +0100, lee wrote:
> Tom H <tomh...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Andrei called d-m.o deprecated because, AFAIK, most of the packages in
> > d-m.o are now available in d.o.
>
> Cinelerra is not in Debian, and I haven't been able to compile it, so
> the only source for it is dmo. You can't even watch a DVD with what's
> in Debian.
Are you referring to libdvdcss2? AFAIUI, there is an ITP out to package
> Tom H <tomh...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Andrei called d-m.o deprecated because, AFAIK, most of the packages in
> > d-m.o are now available in d.o.
>
> Cinelerra is not in Debian, and I haven't been able to compile it, so
> the only source for it is dmo. You can't even watch a DVD with what's
> in Debian.
an installer for it. ... ahh here it is:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=687624
--
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the
oppressing." --- Malcolm X
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Oct 30, 2012, 11:30:01 PM10/30/12
to
Andrei POPESCU <andreim...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Ma, 30 oct 12, 21:09:51, lee wrote:
>>
>> You're ignoring that you cannot run 32bit apps on amd64 anymore ---
>> support for that has been removed and they want to force users to switch
>> to brokenarch which doesn't work.
>
> Firstly, you could have specified that instead of broad statements like
> "32 bit support has been removed from Debian". Debian is much more than
> the amd64 architecture.
That is what 32bit support is about.
> On Ma, 30 oct 12, 21:09:51, lee wrote:
>>
>> You're ignoring that you cannot run 32bit apps on amd64 anymore ---
>> support for that has been removed and they want to force users to switch
>> to brokenarch which doesn't work.
>
> Firstly, you could have specified that instead of broad statements like
> "32 bit support has been removed from Debian". Debian is much more than
> the amd64 architecture.
> Secondly, so far you have not provided any evidence to this.
know. Like I said, it worked, then there was an update and it doesn't
work anymore, probably because they modified the NVIDIA drivers, though
nobody knows. I've sent a bug report and it has been ignored. People
suggested that we're now forced to switch to brokenarch and to use
packages from unstable, which I tried a couple times, and it made things
worse and didn't work and creates dependency problems.
It'll be fun to watch people upgrading to the next release and then find
out that their 32bit software doesn't work anymore. And it's certainly
no fun that Debian becomes more and more like windoze in being
unreliable, in telling you what software and drivers you can or should
use and some other things. Maybe I need to switch to windoze so I can
run the software I want and use drivers that allow me to actually make
use of my hardware without being frowned upon rather than being told
that everything is deprecated and that there is no alternative for it or
only a ridiculously crappy one.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Oct 30, 2012, 11:30:02 PM10/30/12
to
Chris Bannister <cbann...@slingshot.co.nz> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 09:06:37PM +0100, lee wrote:
>> Tom H <tomh...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > Andrei called d-m.o deprecated because, AFAIK, most of the packages in
>> > d-m.o are now available in d.o.
>>
>> Cinelerra is not in Debian, and I haven't been able to compile it, so
>> the only source for it is dmo. You can't even watch a DVD with what's
>> in Debian.
>
> Are you referring to libdvdcss2? AFAIUI, there is an ITP out to package
> an installer for it. ... ahh here it is:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=687624
Yes, and it's still not in Debian testing, besides other software. Just
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 09:06:37PM +0100, lee wrote:
>> Tom H <tomh...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > Andrei called d-m.o deprecated because, AFAIK, most of the packages in
>> > d-m.o are now available in d.o.
>>
>> Cinelerra is not in Debian, and I haven't been able to compile it, so
>> the only source for it is dmo. You can't even watch a DVD with what's
>> in Debian.
>
> Are you referring to libdvdcss2? AFAIUI, there is an ITP out to package
> an installer for it. ... ahh here it is:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=687624
saying that everything is deprecated isn't a solution; it only means
that Debian is deprecated.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87sj8vu...@yun.yagibdah.de
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Oct 30, 2012, 11:30:02 PM10/30/12
to
Andrei POPESCU <andreim...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Ma, 30 oct 12, 21:23:48, lee wrote:
>> Tom H <tomh...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > Thanks. I'm not worried. I was just curious what Lee's misunderstanding was...
>>
>> It's not my misunderstanding. Since a while, 32bit support is gone with
>> no way to get it back, and if I didn't have a 64bit alternative that
>> half-way works, I wouldn't have Debian anymore.
>
> Right...
>
> $ uname -a
> Linux think 3.2.0-4-rt-686-pae #1 SMP PREEMPT RT Debian 3.2.32-1 i686 GNU/Linux
> $ dpkg --print-architecture
> i386
I'm talking about 32bit support so you can run 32bit software on amd64,
> On Ma, 30 oct 12, 21:23:48, lee wrote:
>> Tom H <tomh...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > Thanks. I'm not worried. I was just curious what Lee's misunderstanding was...
>>
>> It's not my misunderstanding. Since a while, 32bit support is gone with
>> no way to get it back, and if I didn't have a 64bit alternative that
>> half-way works, I wouldn't have Debian anymore.
>
> Right...
>
> $ uname -a
> Linux think 3.2.0-4-rt-686-pae #1 SMP PREEMPT RT Debian 3.2.32-1 i686 GNU/Linux
> $ dpkg --print-architecture
> i386
of course. Moving back in time over a decade to an obsolete and
deprecated architecture isn't a solution.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Lisi Reisz
Oct 31, 2012, 5:10:02 AM10/31/12
to
On Wednesday 31 October 2012 03:23:42 lee wrote:
> Chris Bannister <cbann...@slingshot.co.nz> writes:
> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 09:06:37PM +0100, lee wrote:
> >> Tom H <tomh...@gmail.com> writes:
> >> > Andrei called d-m.o deprecated because, AFAIK, most of the packages in
> >> > d-m.o are now available in d.o.
> >>
> >> Cinelerra is not in Debian, and I haven't been able to compile it, so
> >> the only source for it is dmo. You can't even watch a DVD with what's
> >> in Debian.
> >
> > Are you referring to libdvdcss2? AFAIUI, there is an ITP out to package
> > an installer for it. ... ahh here it is:
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=687624
>
> Yes, and it's still not in Debian testing, besides other software. Just
> saying that everything is deprecated isn't a solution; it only means
> that Debian is deprecated.
You seem to be very unhappy with Debian. Why _are_ you still using it? You
> Chris Bannister <cbann...@slingshot.co.nz> writes:
> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 09:06:37PM +0100, lee wrote:
> >> Tom H <tomh...@gmail.com> writes:
> >> > Andrei called d-m.o deprecated because, AFAIK, most of the packages in
> >> > d-m.o are now available in d.o.
> >>
> >> Cinelerra is not in Debian, and I haven't been able to compile it, so
> >> the only source for it is dmo. You can't even watch a DVD with what's
> >> in Debian.
> >
> > Are you referring to libdvdcss2? AFAIUI, there is an ITP out to package
> > an installer for it. ... ahh here it is:
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=687624
>
> Yes, and it's still not in Debian testing, besides other software. Just
> saying that everything is deprecated isn't a solution; it only means
> that Debian is deprecated.
could save your data and install something else. And granted that you would
have to set it up from scratch, at least you wouldn't have to cope with
something you find as irritating as you do Debian and the way you see it as
going.
Lisi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Jochen Spieker
Oct 31, 2012, 5:10:03 AM10/31/12
to
lee:
hardware.
>> Secondly, so far you have not provided any evidence to this.
>
> Just try it and you'll see.
Works for me. But then I don't use nVidia drivers.
> nobody knows. I've sent a bug report and it has been ignored. People
> suggested that we're now forced to switch to brokenarch and to use
> packages from unstable, which I tried a couple times, and it made things
> worse and didn't work and creates dependency problems.
What do you expect when using testing/unstable? Their sole purpose is to
find and fix bugs. If you use it, expect to find bugs.
Really, I can understand if people are a little upset that the
transition (in testing/unstable) to multiarch breaks a few things. And I
am not happy myself that it looks like wheezy will not include a smooth
transition. But that does not mean multiarch is generally broken and
that Debian should keep distributing monstrosities like ia32-libs.
> And it's certainly no fun that Debian becomes more and more like
> windoze in being unreliable, in telling you what software and drivers
> you can or should use and some other things.
Debian as a whole never cared very much for non-free software. This
should not surprise you.
> Maybe I need to switch to windoze […]
Sure, if that helps.
J.
--
When I get home from the supermarket I don't know what to do with all the
plastic.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>
> Andrei POPESCU <andreim...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Firstly, you could have specified that instead of broad statements like
>> "32 bit support has been removed from Debian". Debian is much more than
>> the amd64 architecture.
>
> That is what 32bit support is about.
No. First and foremost, 32 Bit support is about supporting 32 Bit
>
>> Firstly, you could have specified that instead of broad statements like
>> "32 bit support has been removed from Debian". Debian is much more than
>> the amd64 architecture.
>
> That is what 32bit support is about.
hardware.
>> Secondly, so far you have not provided any evidence to this.
>
> Just try it and you'll see.
> nobody knows. I've sent a bug report and it has been ignored. People
> suggested that we're now forced to switch to brokenarch and to use
> packages from unstable, which I tried a couple times, and it made things
> worse and didn't work and creates dependency problems.
find and fix bugs. If you use it, expect to find bugs.
Really, I can understand if people are a little upset that the
transition (in testing/unstable) to multiarch breaks a few things. And I
am not happy myself that it looks like wheezy will not include a smooth
transition. But that does not mean multiarch is generally broken and
that Debian should keep distributing monstrosities like ia32-libs.
> And it's certainly no fun that Debian becomes more and more like
> windoze in being unreliable, in telling you what software and drivers
> you can or should use and some other things.
should not surprise you.
> Maybe I need to switch to windoze […]
Sure, if that helps.
J.
--
When I get home from the supermarket I don't know what to do with all the
plastic.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>
Darac Marjal
Oct 31, 2012, 6:50:02 AM10/31/12
to
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 04:23:42AM +0100, lee wrote:
> Chris Bannister <cbann...@slingshot.co.nz> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 09:06:37PM +0100, lee wrote:
> >> Tom H <tomh...@gmail.com> writes:
> >>
> >> > Andrei called d-m.o deprecated because, AFAIK, most of the packages in
> >> > d-m.o are now available in d.o.
> >>
> >> Cinelerra is not in Debian, and I haven't been able to compile it, so
> >> the only source for it is dmo. You can't even watch a DVD with what's
> >> in Debian.
> >
> > Are you referring to libdvdcss2? AFAIUI, there is an ITP out to package
> > an installer for it. ... ahh here it is:
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=687624
>
> Yes, and it's still not in Debian testing, besides other software. Just
> saying that everything is deprecated isn't a solution; it only means
> that Debian is deprecated.
There's a legal reason for that. The DMCA states that, in US
> Chris Bannister <cbann...@slingshot.co.nz> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 09:06:37PM +0100, lee wrote:
> >> Tom H <tomh...@gmail.com> writes:
> >>
> >> > Andrei called d-m.o deprecated because, AFAIK, most of the packages in
> >> > d-m.o are now available in d.o.
> >>
> >> Cinelerra is not in Debian, and I haven't been able to compile it, so
> >> the only source for it is dmo. You can't even watch a DVD with what's
> >> in Debian.
> >
> > Are you referring to libdvdcss2? AFAIUI, there is an ITP out to package
> > an installer for it. ... ahh here it is:
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=687624
>
> Yes, and it's still not in Debian testing, besides other software. Just
> saying that everything is deprecated isn't a solution; it only means
> that Debian is deprecated.
jurisdictions, one is not permitted to circumvent an access-control
technology such as CSS (the Content Scrambling System employed on most
DVDs). The authorised method for decoding a DVD is to obtain a CSS
decryption key from the DVD Copy Control Association. Obviously, this is
kind of counter to the whole open-source philosophy; if Debian had a
project-wide key, anyone would be able to obtain it from the source code
and thus decrypt any DVD, thus bypassing the access-control and the DVD
Copy Control Association.
libdvdcss2 brute forces the decryption on the disk and, so, might be
considered circumvention under the DMCA. This IS allowed in some cases
and in various other jurisdictions, but it's not really a sensible move
for Debian to freely distribute such a package.
I'm sure this has been discussed to death on debian-legal.
Andrei POPESCU
Oct 31, 2012, 7:30:03 AM10/31/12
to
On Mi, 31 oct 12, 04:13:59, lee wrote:
>
> Just try it and you'll see. Or you figure out how to do it and let me
> know. Like I said, it worked, then there was an update and it doesn't
> work anymore, probably because they modified the NVIDIA drivers, though
> nobody knows. I've sent a bug report and it has been ignored.
And the bug number is? (Yes, I already did look for it)
>
> Just try it and you'll see. Or you figure out how to do it and let me
> know. Like I said, it worked, then there was an update and it doesn't
> work anymore, probably because they modified the NVIDIA drivers, though
> nobody knows. I've sent a bug report and it has been ignored.
> People
> suggested that we're now forced to switch to brokenarch and to use
> packages from unstable, which I tried a couple times, and it made things
> worse and didn't work and creates dependency problems.
was still the mayor of our capital[1], which I'll paraphrase to you:
testing is not stable ;)
[1] "Iarna nu-i ca vara", which translates to: "Winter is not like
summer".
John Hasler
Oct 31, 2012, 9:20:02 AM10/31/12
to
Darac Marjal writes:
> libdvdcss2 brute forces the decryption on the disk and, so, might be
> considered circumvention under the DMCA. This IS allowed in some
> cases...
> libdvdcss2 brute forces the decryption on the disk and, so, might be
> considered circumvention under the DMCA. This IS allowed in some
It is legal to use it to access a DVD you own in the USA as long as you
make no infringing copies. The problem is that the CCA contends that
the primary purpose of libdvdcss2 is circumvention and so, they contend,
distributing it is illegal. If it can be established that its primary
purpose in not copyright infringement it will be legal. That has not
yet been done so Debian cannot risk distributing it.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Oct 31, 2012, 10:50:01 AM10/31/12
to
Darac Marjal <maili...@darac.org.uk> writes:
> libdvdcss2 brute forces the decryption on the disk and, so, might be
> considered circumvention under the DMCA. This IS allowed in some cases
> and in various other jurisdictions, but it's not really a sensible move
> for Debian to freely distribute such a package.
I'm aware that there are legal issues involved. Are there such issues
> libdvdcss2 brute forces the decryption on the disk and, so, might be
> considered circumvention under the DMCA. This IS allowed in some cases
> and in various other jurisdictions, but it's not really a sensible move
> for Debian to freely distribute such a package.
with other software that is available only from dmo and not in Debian,
like cinelerra?
It is not illegal to use NVIDIA drivers, yet they are deprecated,
without alternative. It is probably not illegal to use firmware to get
hardware working that doesn't work without, yet firmware is deprecated,
without alternative.
The obsession with free software unfortunately leads to dead ends.
Apparently even developers now don't want to stay 20 years behind
technology anymore, so they have regressed to deprecate everything
that's not free software to force the issue. That's probably leading to
a dead end as well, and I don't want to get stuck there.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Oct 31, 2012, 10:50:02 AM10/31/12
to
Jochen Spieker <m...@well-adjusted.de> writes:
> lee:
>> Andrei POPESCU <andreim...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Firstly, you could have specified that instead of broad statements like
>>> "32 bit support has been removed from Debian". Debian is much more than
>>> the amd64 architecture.
>>
>> That is what 32bit support is about.
>
> No. First and foremost, 32 Bit support is about supporting 32 Bit
> hardware.
Do you still buy 32bit CPUs?
> lee:
>> Andrei POPESCU <andreim...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Firstly, you could have specified that instead of broad statements like
>>> "32 bit support has been removed from Debian". Debian is much more than
>>> the amd64 architecture.
>>
>> That is what 32bit support is about.
>
> No. First and foremost, 32 Bit support is about supporting 32 Bit
> hardware.
>>> Secondly, so far you have not provided any evidence to this.
>>
>> Just try it and you'll see.
>
> Works for me. But then I don't use nVidia drivers.
problem is still unknown.
>> nobody knows. I've sent a bug report and it has been ignored. People
>> suggested that we're now forced to switch to brokenarch and to use
>> packages from unstable, which I tried a couple times, and it made things
>> worse and didn't work and creates dependency problems.
>
> What do you expect when using testing/unstable? Their sole purpose is to
> find and fix bugs. If you use it, expect to find bugs.
And what choice do you have? NVIDIA drivers in stable are so ancient
you can't really use them anymore, and even in testing, some packages
are too old to still use them.
> Really, I can understand if people are a little upset that the
> transition (in testing/unstable) to multiarch breaks a few things. And I
> am not happy myself that it looks like wheezy will not include a smooth
> transition. But that does not mean multiarch is generally broken and
> that Debian should keep distributing monstrosities like ia32-libs.
that is what experimental and maybe unstable are for, testing is not.
That they decide to force users to brokenarch just before a new release
is supposed to come out which will leave users who need 32bit support
screwed because it won't be fixed for that release is a very bad idea.
There hasn't been anything wrong with ia32-libs. When they want to
enforce sucking brokenarch, they should have either waited until after
the next release or get it ready before the next release and give users
detailed instructions so that they can switch without problems.
>> And it's certainly no fun that Debian becomes more and more like
>> windoze in being unreliable, in telling you what software and drivers
>> you can or should use and some other things.
>
> Debian as a whole never cared very much for non-free software. This
> should not surprise you.
"we want to make things work" to "we don't care and everything we don't
like is deprecated and if you don't do as we say and/or want things to
work, you're screwed". It makes Linux deprecated.
>> Maybe I need to switch to windoze […]
>
> Sure, if that helps.
need a trial version.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Oct 31, 2012, 10:50:02 AM10/31/12
to
Andrei POPESCU <andreim...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mi, 31 oct 12, 04:13:59, lee wrote:
>>
>> Just try it and you'll see. Or you figure out how to do it and let me
>> know. Like I said, it worked, then there was an update and it doesn't
>> work anymore, probably because they modified the NVIDIA drivers, though
>> nobody knows. I've sent a bug report and it has been ignored.
>
> And the bug number is? (Yes, I already did look for it)
688714
> On Mi, 31 oct 12, 04:13:59, lee wrote:
>>
>> Just try it and you'll see. Or you figure out how to do it and let me
>> know. Like I said, it worked, then there was an update and it doesn't
>> work anymore, probably because they modified the NVIDIA drivers, though
>> nobody knows. I've sent a bug report and it has been ignored.
>
> And the bug number is? (Yes, I already did look for it)
>> People
>> suggested that we're now forced to switch to brokenarch and to use
>> packages from unstable, which I tried a couple times, and it made things
>> worse and didn't work and creates dependency problems.
>
> There's a famous quote from our current president from the time when he
> was still the mayor of our capital[1], which I'll paraphrase to you:
>
> testing is not stable ;)
brokenarch and are supposed to try packages from unstable which create
only more dependency problems and mess things up even further.
Think it through and you'll see that there won't be a next stable
release unless they fix the mess they made --- and they're not going to
do that. Stable is obsolete and deprecated.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Oct 31, 2012, 10:50:02 AM10/31/12
to
Lisi Reisz <lisi....@gmail.com> writes:
> You seem to be very unhappy with Debian. Why _are_ you still using
> it?
It's because I haven't found an alternative yet, and it's very time
> You seem to be very unhappy with Debian. Why _are_ you still using
> it?
consuming to switch.
> You could save your data and install something else.
> And granted that you would have to set it up from scratch,
that's a good idea.
> at least you wouldn't have to cope with something you find as
> irritating as you do Debian and the way you see it as going.
windoze. I might try gentoo, but it's probably not much different.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87objiu...@yun.yagibdah.de
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Lisi Reisz
Oct 31, 2012, 11:00:02 AM10/31/12
to
On Wednesday 31 October 2012 14:22:31 lee wrote:
> Lisi Reisz <lisi....@gmail.com> writes:
> > You seem to be very unhappy with Debian. Why _are_ you still using
> > it?
>
> It's because I haven't found an alternative yet, and it's very time
> consuming to switch.
>
> > You could save your data and install something else.
>
> Yes, but what?
>
> > And granted that you would have to set it up from scratch,
>
> Not if I switch to another Linux distribution --- and I'm not so sure if
> that's a good idea.
>
> > at least you wouldn't have to cope with something you find as
> > irritating as you do Debian and the way you see it as going.
>
> It might not only be Debian. Perhaps it's just stupid not to use
> windoze. I might try gentoo, but it's probably not much different.
I have heard that Windows 7 isn't bad. You might well prefer it. At least it
> Lisi Reisz <lisi....@gmail.com> writes:
> > You seem to be very unhappy with Debian. Why _are_ you still using
> > it?
>
> It's because I haven't found an alternative yet, and it's very time
> consuming to switch.
>
> > You could save your data and install something else.
>
> Yes, but what?
>
> > And granted that you would have to set it up from scratch,
>
> Not if I switch to another Linux distribution --- and I'm not so sure if
> that's a good idea.
>
> > at least you wouldn't have to cope with something you find as
> > irritating as you do Debian and the way you see it as going.
>
> It might not only be Debian. Perhaps it's just stupid not to use
> windoze. I might try gentoo, but it's probably not much different.
will have proprietary stuff and drivers for new hardware
It really does seem pointless to stick with Debian if you dislike it so much.
Lisi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Darac Marjal
Oct 31, 2012, 11:30:02 AM10/31/12
to
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 03:39:04PM +0100, lee wrote:
> Darac Marjal <maili...@darac.org.uk> writes:
>
> > libdvdcss2 brute forces the decryption on the disk and, so, might be
> > considered circumvention under the DMCA. This IS allowed in some cases
> > and in various other jurisdictions, but it's not really a sensible move
> > for Debian to freely distribute such a package.
>
> I'm aware that there are legal issues involved. Are there such issues
> with other software that is available only from dmo and not in Debian,
> like cinelerra?
I'm not familiar with cinelerra but, according to the BTS([1] and [2]),
> Darac Marjal <maili...@darac.org.uk> writes:
>
> > libdvdcss2 brute forces the decryption on the disk and, so, might be
> > considered circumvention under the DMCA. This IS allowed in some cases
> > and in various other jurisdictions, but it's not really a sensible move
> > for Debian to freely distribute such a package.
>
> I'm aware that there are legal issues involved. Are there such issues
> with other software that is available only from dmo and not in Debian,
> like cinelerra?
there have been two^Wseveral attempts to package cinelerra that have
fallen by the wayside. That latter bug seems to suggest that cinelerra
depends on non-free software (so it could, perhaps, go in contrib).
As ever, if you care about this software, consider helping to fix the
remaining issues.
>
> It is not illegal to use NVIDIA drivers, yet they are deprecated,
> without alternative. It is probably not illegal to use firmware to get
> hardware working that doesn't work without, yet firmware is deprecated,
> without alternative.
by any means.
1. nvidia-glx is in non-free due to licensing restrictions (NVIDIA state
at [3] that the "SOFTWARE [...] may be copied and redistributed,
provided that the binary files thereof are not modified in any way"
and that Debian "may not [...] attempt in any other matter to obtain
the source code". So, while it's legal to use the software, it's not
legal to use the source. Thus, it's a complete black box. There is NO
way to know that a problem on a system with the NVIDIA driver is not
caused by that driver.
2. As an alternative there ARE the nouveau and nv drivers. These are
reported to display desktops on several of the NVIDIA devices but, of
course, they're reverse-engineered by volunteers so likely don't work
as well as the driver by the people who actually designed the
hardware.
So you have two options, use the NVIDIA driver (with the knowledge that
it "may access, collect non-personally identifiable information about,
update, and configure Customer's system in order to properly optimize
such system for use with the SOFTWARE") or use the open driver.
>
> The obsession with free software unfortunately leads to dead ends.
> Apparently even developers now don't want to stay 20 years behind
> technology anymore, so they have regressed to deprecate everything
> that's not free software to force the issue. That's probably leading to
> a dead end as well, and I don't want to get stuck there.
Debian bans you from using non-free software. There is only the
understanding that support for non-free software is the responsibility
of that software's provider.
Anyway, I feel like I'm feeding a troll here, so I'll just point you to
Debian's Social Contract[4] which describes this better than I can.
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=78209
[2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=331072
[3] http://www.geforce.com/drivers/license
[4] http://www.debian.org/social_contract
John Hasler
Oct 31, 2012, 11:50:02 AM10/31/12
to
lee writes:
> It is not illegal to use NVIDIA drivers, yet they are deprecated,
> without alternative. It is probably not illegal to use firmware to
> get hardware working that doesn't work without, yet firmware is
> deprecated, without alternative.
> The obsession with free software unfortunately leads to dead ends.
You clearly do not want to use Debian. Free Software is what Debian is
> It is not illegal to use NVIDIA drivers, yet they are deprecated,
> without alternative. It is probably not illegal to use firmware to
> get hardware working that doesn't work without, yet firmware is
> deprecated, without alternative.
> The obsession with free software unfortunately leads to dead ends.
about.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Lisi Reisz
Oct 31, 2012, 12:50:02 PM10/31/12
to
On Wednesday 31 October 2012 15:25:52 Darac Marjal wrote:
> Anyway, I feel like I'm feeding a troll here, so I'll just point you to
> Debian's Social Contract[4] which describes this better than I can
He likes moaning. ;-) We are suggesting ways of solving his problem, but it
> Anyway, I feel like I'm feeding a troll here, so I'll just point you to
> Debian's Social Contract[4] which describes this better than I can
is more fun to slag off the poor developers who do a great job without pay.
The obvious thing to do if he dislikes Debian so much is to stop using it.
But that would be no fun because he might have to stop moaning.
And it does rather sound as though he might be better off with Windows. But
at whom would he moan in that case?
:-)
Lisi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
John Hasler
Oct 31, 2012, 1:10:02 PM10/31/12
to
Lisi writes:
> And it does rather sound as though he might be better off with
> Windows. But at whom would he moan in that case?
Microsoft, of course, with the advantage that there would be no danger
> And it does rather sound as though he might be better off with
> Windows. But at whom would he moan in that case?
that they would fix the problems that he moaned about.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Tom H
Oct 31, 2012, 3:00:03 PM10/31/12
to
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:04 AM, lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de> wrote:
> Andrei POPESCU <andreim...@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Mi, 31 oct 12, 04:13:59, lee wrote:
>>>
>>> Just try it and you'll see. Or you figure out how to do it and let me
>>> know. Like I said, it worked, then there was an update and it doesn't
>>> work anymore, probably because they modified the NVIDIA drivers, though
>>> nobody knows. I've sent a bug report and it has been ignored.
>>
>> And the bug number is? (Yes, I already did look for it)
>
> 688714
>
>>> People
>>> suggested that we're now forced to switch to brokenarch and to use
>>> packages from unstable, which I tried a couple times, and it made things
>>> worse and didn't work and creates dependency problems.
>>
>> There's a famous quote from our current president from the time when he
>> was still the mayor of our capital[1], which I'll paraphrase to you:
>>
>> testing is not stable ;)
>
> Yeah and that's why you are forced to turn your system into a mess with
> brokenarch and are supposed to try packages from unstable which create
> only more dependency problems and mess things up even further.
>
> Think it through and you'll see that there won't be a next stable
> release unless they fix the mess they made --- and they're not going to
> do that. Stable is obsolete and deprecated.
If testing never had any breakage, why would anyone bother with
> Andrei POPESCU <andreim...@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Mi, 31 oct 12, 04:13:59, lee wrote:
>>>
>>> Just try it and you'll see. Or you figure out how to do it and let me
>>> know. Like I said, it worked, then there was an update and it doesn't
>>> work anymore, probably because they modified the NVIDIA drivers, though
>>> nobody knows. I've sent a bug report and it has been ignored.
>>
>> And the bug number is? (Yes, I already did look for it)
>
> 688714
>
>>> People
>>> suggested that we're now forced to switch to brokenarch and to use
>>> packages from unstable, which I tried a couple times, and it made things
>>> worse and didn't work and creates dependency problems.
>>
>> There's a famous quote from our current president from the time when he
>> was still the mayor of our capital[1], which I'll paraphrase to you:
>>
>> testing is not stable ;)
>
> Yeah and that's why you are forced to turn your system into a mess with
> brokenarch and are supposed to try packages from unstable which create
> only more dependency problems and mess things up even further.
>
> Think it through and you'll see that there won't be a next stable
> release unless they fix the mess they made --- and they're not going to
> do that. Stable is obsolete and deprecated.
stable?! Anyone reasonable knows that they have to expect problems
when using a version of ANYTHING that's labeled testing and especially
in this particular case where its sole purpose is to debug the next
version of Debian.
If you consider stable obsolete and are unhappy with testing, maybe
you should try a more fast-moving distribution or a rolling
distribution where there MIGHT be less breakage than in testing.
In this thread and in your bug report, you're more interested in
whining and criticizing than in fixing your system. AFAICT, you've
been advised to install packages from experimental and you haven't.
Furthermore, you may have been having a bad day but, over and above
your misunderstanding of the purpose of testing, your syadmin skills
are suspect since you're not sure whether you need xserver-xorg [1],
uninstall it [2], and are surprised that you have to re-install it [3,4] in
order to run X and they don't inspire confidence that you're up to
running testing.
1. "Libxvmc1 is installed because xserver-xorg-video-openchrome (which
I don't need) depends on it, and xserver-xorg-video-openchrome is
installed because xserver-xorg (which I probably need) depends on it."
2. "BTW I have removed the xserver-org package"
3. "startx says it cannot find /usr/bin/X. It actually doesn't exist
--- has that been moved or what happened to it?"
4. "I found I needed to re-install xserver-xorg"
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Chris Bannister
Nov 1, 2012, 7:30:02 AM11/1/12
to
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 03:04:49PM +0100, lee wrote:
> Yeah and that's why you are forced to turn your system into a mess with
> brokenarch and are supposed to try packages from unstable which create
> only more dependency problems and mess things up even further.
>
> Think it through and you'll see that there won't be a next stable
> release unless they fix the mess they made --- and they're not going to
> do that. Stable is obsolete and deprecated.
OK. Lets work through your problems, or can't you be bothered. I also
> Yeah and that's why you are forced to turn your system into a mess with
> brokenarch and are supposed to try packages from unstable which create
> only more dependency problems and mess things up even further.
>
> Think it through and you'll see that there won't be a next stable
> release unless they fix the mess they made --- and they're not going to
> do that. Stable is obsolete and deprecated.
think this thread (although under a better name, for search purposes) would be
good for the archives.
So, have you got dependency problems at the moment?
What is output of "apt-get -f install" ?
--
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the
oppressing." --- Malcolm X
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121101111735.GN13309@tal
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Nov 1, 2012, 1:50:02 PM11/1/12
to
John Hasler <jha...@newsguy.com> writes:
> lee writes:
>> It is not illegal to use NVIDIA drivers, yet they are deprecated,
>> without alternative. It is probably not illegal to use firmware to
>> get hardware working that doesn't work without, yet firmware is
>> deprecated, without alternative.
>
>> The obsession with free software unfortunately leads to dead ends.
>
> You clearly do not want to use Debian.
Yes, they messed it up beyond repair, and I'm done with it.
> lee writes:
>> It is not illegal to use NVIDIA drivers, yet they are deprecated,
>> without alternative. It is probably not illegal to use firmware to
>> get hardware working that doesn't work without, yet firmware is
>> deprecated, without alternative.
>
>> The obsession with free software unfortunately leads to dead ends.
>
> You clearly do not want to use Debian.
> Free Software is what Debian is about.
though.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87625pt...@yun.yagibdah.de
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Nov 1, 2012, 1:50:02 PM11/1/12
to
John Hasler <jha...@newsguy.com> writes:
> Lisi writes:
>> And it does rather sound as though he might be better off with
>> Windows. But at whom would he moan in that case?
>
> Microsoft, of course, with the advantage that there would be no danger
> that they would fix the problems that he moaned about.
Hilarious :)) Now it's even considered dangerous that problems might be
> Lisi writes:
>> And it does rather sound as though he might be better off with
>> Windows. But at whom would he moan in that case?
>
> Microsoft, of course, with the advantage that there would be no danger
> that they would fix the problems that he moaned about.
fixed. Keep going that way :))
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87a9v1t...@yun.yagibdah.de
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Nov 1, 2012, 1:50:02 PM11/1/12
to
Lisi Reisz <lisi....@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wednesday 31 October 2012 15:25:52 Darac Marjal wrote:
>> Anyway, I feel like I'm feeding a troll here, so I'll just point you to
>> Debian's Social Contract[4] which describes this better than I can
>
> He likes moaning. ;-) We are suggesting ways of solving his problem, but it
> is more fun to slag off the poor developers who do a great job without pay.
The only thing you have suggested is to stop using Debian, and I don't
> On Wednesday 31 October 2012 15:25:52 Darac Marjal wrote:
>> Anyway, I feel like I'm feeding a troll here, so I'll just point you to
>> Debian's Social Contract[4] which describes this better than I can
>
> He likes moaning. ;-) We are suggesting ways of solving his problem, but it
> is more fun to slag off the poor developers who do a great job without pay.
call that a solution. It's really funny because a suggestion like that
fits this mailing list perfectly :))
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ehkdt...@yun.yagibdah.de
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Nov 1, 2012, 1:50:02 PM11/1/12
to
Darac Marjal <maili...@darac.org.uk> writes:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 03:39:04PM +0100, lee wrote:
> I'm not familiar with cinelerra but, according to the BTS([1] and [2]),
> there have been two^Wseveral attempts to package cinelerra that have
> fallen by the wayside. That latter bug seems to suggest that cinelerra
> depends on non-free software (so it could, perhaps, go in contrib).
>
> As ever, if you care about this software, consider helping to fix the
> remaining issues.
If Debian wanted help, they won't make it so difficult for everyone to
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 03:39:04PM +0100, lee wrote:
> I'm not familiar with cinelerra but, according to the BTS([1] and [2]),
> there have been two^Wseveral attempts to package cinelerra that have
> fallen by the wayside. That latter bug seems to suggest that cinelerra
> depends on non-free software (so it could, perhaps, go in contrib).
>
> As ever, if you care about this software, consider helping to fix the
> remaining issues.
help them. It's not my problem that they make things so
difficult for themselves.
Besides, I was told in an answer to a bug report that 32bit support will
not be available in the next release, so Debian is deprecated now, and
I'm done with it. Who knows what they screw up next.
> So you have two options, use the NVIDIA driver (with the knowledge that
> it "may access, collect non-personally identifiable information about,
> update, and configure Customer's system in order to properly optimize
> such system for use with the SOFTWARE") or use the open driver.
work and is ridiculously slow. The NVIDIA driver is excellent and has
been for the last 15 years or so, and it's frowned upon by developers
and deprecated. The NVIDIA driver in stable is ancient and you have to
use at least testing, better unstable to get an up to date driver. I've
been using the NVIDIA one rather than the NVIDIA version that's in
Debian, and the NVIDIA one gave me a lot less problems. So after about
15 years, there still isn't an alternative.
Sure I would prefer an open source driver. That doesn't help because
there is none. Last time I tried the nouveau one it was even too slow
for a plain X-session, so I won't even say they could make it so that we
could switch drivers on the fly because there is no point in doing that.
>> The obsession with free software unfortunately leads to dead ends.
>> Apparently even developers now don't want to stay 20 years behind
>> technology anymore, so they have regressed to deprecate everything
>> that's not free software to force the issue. That's probably leading to
>> a dead end as well, and I don't want to get stuck there.
>
> What would you have them do otherwise?
Debian wouldn't need to have a messed up version and/or ancient version
of the NVIDIA drivers if they just looked at what NVIDIA provides and
made sure that it integrates without causing the problems they claim it
causes. Developers could acknowledge that there is software they cannot
get their hands on and that this software, as unfortunate as it may be,
is essential, and they could try to make the best out of this situation.
> Nothing (that I'm aware of) in Debian bans you from using non-free
> software. There is only the understanding that support for non-free
> software is the responsibility of that software's provider.
continues to provide excellent non-free drivers since 15 years or so.
Dmo doesn't seem to have a problem with non-free software that you say
cinelerra depends upon. Things become difficult when developers of free
software refuse to accept that there is such a thing as non-free
software which may be important for users. I can understand that they
get tired of being confronted with non-free software, yet that doesn't
help. When their attitude leads them into a dead end, that's their
choice, and it's unfortunate because it takes alternatives away users
had.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Lisi Reisz
Nov 1, 2012, 2:00:01 PM11/1/12
to
On Thursday 01 November 2012 17:16:24 lee wrote:
> Lisi Reisz <lisi....@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Wednesday 31 October 2012 15:25:52 Darac Marjal wrote:
> >> Anyway, I feel like I'm feeding a troll here, so I'll just point you to
> >> Debian's Social Contract[4] which describes this better than I can
> >
> > He likes moaning. ;-) We are suggesting ways of solving his problem, but
> > it is more fun to slag off the poor developers who do a great job without
> > pay.
>
> The only thing you have suggested is to stop using Debian, and I don't
> call that a solution. It's really funny because a suggestion like that
> fits this mailing list perfectly :))
It is much the best solution to the problem you keep expounding. You clearly
> Lisi Reisz <lisi....@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Wednesday 31 October 2012 15:25:52 Darac Marjal wrote:
> >> Anyway, I feel like I'm feeding a troll here, so I'll just point you to
> >> Debian's Social Contract[4] which describes this better than I can
> >
> > He likes moaning. ;-) We are suggesting ways of solving his problem, but
> > it is more fun to slag off the poor developers who do a great job without
> > pay.
>
> The only thing you have suggested is to stop using Debian, and I don't
> call that a solution. It's really funny because a suggestion like that
> fits this mailing list perfectly :))
dislike Debian intensely, so it is daft to keep using it. Windows would give
you everything you say you want: up to date hardware support and proprietary
drivers. And no FLOSS dead ends.
Debian has decided to go back to its roots. Since you so profoundly disagree
with the policy, stop using Debian. The developers are volunteers. They can
do what they want to do. You could always pay someone to develop a fork for
you, or develop it for yourself. There are plenty of distros with different
policies - and there is Windows. And OSX, of course.
Debian is what it is. Most of us like it, which is why we use it. If you
don't like it, don't use it.
Lisi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Kelly Clowers
Nov 1, 2012, 2:30:01 PM11/1/12
to
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:09 AM, lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de> wrote:
>
>
> Besides, I was told in an answer to a bug report that 32bit support will
> not be available in the next release,
Yeah, right. I'll believe that when I see a formal announcement of
>
>
> Besides, I was told in an answer to a bug report that 32bit support will
> not be available in the next release,
it on the front page of debian.org and on debian-announce. I expect
it sometime between 2038 and never. Unless you mean something
besides support for i386/x86-32, but there is no indication of that
from the context.
Cheers,
Kelly Clowers
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Jochen Spieker
Nov 1, 2012, 5:40:03 PM11/1/12
to
lee:
> NVIDIA continues to provide excellent non-free drivers since 15 years
> or so.
You are of course entitled to your own opinion. But you should be aware
that most people in the Free Softare world (and probably most people
running some Linux distro) oppose that claim.
J.
--
Nothing is as I planned it.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>
> Darac Marjal <maili...@darac.org.uk> writes:
>
>> Nothing (that I'm aware of) in Debian bans you from using non-free
>> software. There is only the understanding that support for non-free
>> software is the responsibility of that software's provider.
>
> You already can't use it anymore when it's 32bit software.
As a general statement this is simply not true.
>
>> Nothing (that I'm aware of) in Debian bans you from using non-free
>> software. There is only the understanding that support for non-free
>> software is the responsibility of that software's provider.
>
> You already can't use it anymore when it's 32bit software.
> NVIDIA continues to provide excellent non-free drivers since 15 years
> or so.
that most people in the Free Softare world (and probably most people
running some Linux distro) oppose that claim.
J.
--
Nothing is as I planned it.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>
Go Linux
Nov 1, 2012, 7:50:02 PM11/1/12
to
--- On Thu, 11/1/12, lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de> wrote:
> From: lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de>
> Subject: Re: compiling a Debian package
> To: debia...@lists.debian.org
> Date: Thursday, November 1, 2012, 12:35 PM
>
> Don't worry, I like free software a lot. I don't like
> dead ends,
> though.
>
I am finding problems getting some multimedia apps to work properly on wheezy. Certain features of avidemux 2.5.6 crash. 2.6 barely works at all. Their custom install script uses sudo (which isn't enabled by default on Debian). DVDStyler isn't even in the deb multimedia repos for wheezy but there are plenty of .debs available for 'buntu. It seems that media devs are putting time into getting things going on 'buntu but leaving Debian behind. Hmmmm . . . I wonder why . . . I want to stick with Debian but may have to keep my media work indefinitely on squeeze if things don't straighten out on wheezy. Or find a more media friendly distro. Right now I'm feeling frustrated on the way to po'd. Thankfully, I did manage to get the driver for the old nvidia card installed with the sgfxi script but had to blacklist nouveau to get it to work.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1351813254.84015...@web163403.mail.gq1.yahoo.com
lee
Nov 2, 2012, 9:30:02 PM11/2/12
to
Kelly Clowers <kelly....@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:09 AM, lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Besides, I was told in an answer to a bug report that 32bit support will
>> not be available in the next release,
>
>
> Yeah, right. I'll believe that when I see a formal announcement of
> it on the front page of debian.org and on debian-announce.
It doesn't matter what you believe. Just try to get applications that
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:09 AM, lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Besides, I was told in an answer to a bug report that 32bit support will
>> not be available in the next release,
>
>
> Yeah, right. I'll believe that when I see a formal announcement of
> it on the front page of debian.org and on debian-announce.
used to work fine to work again, and you'll see.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87r4obr...@yun.yagibdah.de
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Nov 2, 2012, 9:30:02 PM11/2/12
to
Go Linux <gol...@yahoo.com> writes:
> po'd. Thankfully, I did manage to get the driver for the old nvidia
> card installed with the sgfxi script but had to blacklist nouveau to
> get it to work.
Just use either the drivers from their website or the Debian version of
> po'd. Thankfully, I did manage to get the driver for the old nvidia
> card installed with the sgfxi script but had to blacklist nouveau to
> get it to work.
those. Won't that work?
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ip9nr...@yun.yagibdah.de
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Nov 2, 2012, 9:30:02 PM11/2/12
to
Lisi Reisz <lisi....@gmail.com> writes:
> It is much the best solution to the problem you keep expounding.
It is not a solution at all.
> It is much the best solution to the problem you keep expounding.
> You clearly dislike Debian intensely, so it is daft to keep using it.
> Windows would give you everything you say you want: up to date
> hardware support and proprietary drivers. And no FLOSS dead ends.
and which is required because unfortunately, there is no alternative.
> Debian has decided to go back to its roots.
> Debian is what it is. Most of us like it, which is why we use it. If you
> don't like it, don't use it.
long time go down like that. And it's not easy to find a replacement,
so it'll take some time.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87vcdnr...@yun.yagibdah.de
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
lee
Nov 2, 2012, 9:30:02 PM11/2/12
to
Jochen Spieker <m...@well-adjusted.de> writes:
> lee:
>> Darac Marjal <maili...@darac.org.uk> writes:
>>
>>> Nothing (that I'm aware of) in Debian bans you from using non-free
>>> software. There is only the understanding that support for non-free
>>> software is the responsibility of that software's provider.
>>
>> You already can't use it anymore when it's 32bit software.
>
> As a general statement this is simply not true.
Sure is; if it wasn't true, the applications that used to work would
> lee:
>> Darac Marjal <maili...@darac.org.uk> writes:
>>
>>> Nothing (that I'm aware of) in Debian bans you from using non-free
>>> software. There is only the understanding that support for non-free
>>> software is the responsibility of that software's provider.
>>
>> You already can't use it anymore when it's 32bit software.
>
> As a general statement this is simply not true.
still work. They haven't changed.
>> NVIDIA continues to provide excellent non-free drivers since 15 years
>> or so.
>
> You are of course entitled to your own opinion. But you should be aware
> that most people in the Free Softare world (and probably most people
> running some Linux distro) oppose that claim.
have about this. Such opinions don't change the fact that NVIDIA cards
have always been working great for me with the drivers provided by
NVIDIA.
If you know an alternative that gives me at least the same performance,
reliability and trouble-free operation for the same money which
exclusively uses free software, then let me know what it is. I'd be
happy to see such an alternative.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Go Linux
Nov 3, 2012, 12:10:01 AM11/3/12
to
--- On Fri, 11/2/12, lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de> wrote:
> From: lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de>
> Subject: Re: compiling a Debian package
> To: debia...@lists.debian.org
> Date: Friday, November 2, 2012, 6:11 PM
> Go Linux <gol...@yahoo.com>
> writes:
>
> > po'd. Thankfully, I did manage to get the driver
> for the old nvidia
> > card installed with the sgfxi script but had to
> blacklist nouveau to
> > get it to work.
>
> Just use either the drivers from their website or the Debian
> version of
> those. Won't that work?
>
>
The Debian version of the driver wouldn't install. It advised me to use nouveau during the failed process. I had never used the sgfxi script before. It identifies the correct driver and downloads it from the nvidia site. Not without a few bumps but thankfully worked in the end. Card is a 4000 series which is on the edge of no longer being supported.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1351915256.48118...@web163403.mail.gq1.yahoo.com
lee
Nov 3, 2012, 3:50:01 PM11/3/12
to
Go Linux <gol...@yahoo.com> writes:
>> Just use either the drivers from their website or the Debian
>> version of
>> those. Won't that work?
>>
>>
>
> The Debian version of the driver wouldn't install. It advised me to
> use nouveau during the failed process. I had never used the sgfxi
> script before.
sgfxi script?
>> Just use either the drivers from their website or the Debian
>> version of
>> those. Won't that work?
>>
>>
>
> The Debian version of the driver wouldn't install. It advised me to
> use nouveau during the failed process. I had never used the sgfxi
> script before.
> It identifies the correct driver and downloads it from the nvidia
> site. Not without a few bumps but thankfully worked in the end. Card
> is a 4000 series which is on the edge of no longer being supported.
installed it. When your card is that old, it's time for a new one.
--
Debian testing iad96 brokenarch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87r4oap...@yun.yagibdah.de
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Go Linux
Nov 3, 2012, 5:50:02 PM11/3/12
to
--- On Sat, 11/3/12, lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de> wrote:
> From: lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de>
> Subject: Re: compiling a Debian package
> To: debia...@lists.debian.org
> Date: Saturday, November 3, 2012, 2:42 PM
> Go Linux <gol...@yahoo.com>
> writes:
>
> >> Just use either the drivers from their website or
> the Debian
> >> version of
> >> those. Won't that work?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > The Debian version of the driver wouldn't
> install. It advised me to
> > use nouveau during the failed process. I had never used
> the sgfxi
> > script before.
>
> sgfxi script?
>
Yes. From here http://smxi.org/ SalineOS even has it available on a basic install. Unfortunately, the dkms 'debian way' wouldn't work this time.
> > It identifies the correct driver and downloads it from
> the nvidia
> > site. Not without a few bumps but thankfully
> worked in the end. Card
> > is a 4000 series which is on the edge of no longer
> being supported.
>
> I always just downloaded the latest version from their
> website and
> installed it. When your card is that old, it's time
> for a new one.
>
Yeah . . . I have an old 8400 laying around if nouveau still isn't working when jessie arrives.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1351978885.15142...@web163401.mail.gq1.yahoo.com
Charles Kroeger
Nov 5, 2012, 12:30:03 PM11/5/12
to
On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 05:20:01 +0100
lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de> wrote:
> apt-get build-dep dvbcut
> apt-get source dvbcut
> cd dvbcut
> debuild -us -uc
>
>
> ... fails with a number of errors:
I hastily went through all the post with this subject and didn't notice anyone
suggesting:
apt-get install checkinstall
apt-get install auto-apt
I noticed that auto-apt has been around a while and was an orphan too, yet I see it
is still in the docs and the cache and is de rigueur' for checkinstall.
These two packages are supposed to make building from source a simple pleasure.
--
CK
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/afq9tr...@mid.individual.net
lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de> wrote:
> apt-get build-dep dvbcut
> apt-get source dvbcut
> cd dvbcut
> debuild -us -uc
>
>
> ... fails with a number of errors:
I hastily went through all the post with this subject and didn't notice anyone
suggesting:
apt-get install checkinstall
apt-get install auto-apt
I noticed that auto-apt has been around a while and was an orphan too, yet I see it
is still in the docs and the cache and is de rigueur' for checkinstall.
These two packages are supposed to make building from source a simple pleasure.
--
CK
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
0 new messages