FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-20-2009, 08:33 PM
Saphirus Sage
 
Default

I'm a total ~ARCH user, just because part of me really loves the joys of debugging. Honestly, on the rare occasion that something doesn't work, I've found a lesson is best learned when it is necessary. So in short, a bug is just a chance to learn to do something slightly differently.*
Anyway, for a low-spec system, installing from binaries when possible would probably be a good idea. Other than that, just be specific in what you want with your USE flags.*

On Jan 20, 2009, at 4:16 PM, Nick Cunningham <nick@monkeydust.net> wrote:



2009/1/20 Paul Hartman <paul.hartman+gentoo@gmail.com>

On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 2:36 PM, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:

> Mark Knecht ha scritto:

>

>> * *The one thing I would respectfully suggest is that you carefully

>> build your own portage overlay. My experience with Gentoo over the

>> last few years is that there is a _anxiousness_ in the portage

>> maintainer area to move newer revisions of software into portage

>> quickly and then just as quickly to remove from portage what users are

>> currently using.

>

> Really?

>

> I am usually a bit annoyed by the contrary. On an almost 1-year old

> Kubuntu (8.04 Hardy Heron) I can find packages that are just barely x86

> stable now on Gentoo.

>

> A couple of examples I am aware of:

> Firefox 3: stable just since one month on Gentoo x86, was included in KB8.04

> Qtiplot: 0.9.x stable and working on KB8.04, all releases ~x86 (and a

> hell to compile on a stable system -still didn't manage to do it) in Gentoo.

>

> Python releases are often behind, and not mentioning KDE 4, which is

> even default on 8.10 Kubuntu and on Gentoo was still hardmasked last

> time I checked (but probably Gentoo is just right in this respect,

> everyone keeps telling me to wait before digging into KDE 4).

>

> I fully understand that there are good reasons for that, and that the

> meta-distribution status of Gentoo makes harder to check packages (and

> also that the Ubuntu folks wildly release unstable stuff... firefox 3 rc

> in 8.04, for example). I just feel that (stable) Gentoo is actually a

> bit *behind* the average Linux distribution in its revisions of software.

>

> Most importantly, I also feel that that's something new: when I first

> installed my system, more than 4 years ago, I felt it was *ahead*. I

> wonder if it's due just to the sheer increase of work required to test

> packages, or if there are decisions behind that (or if it's just me

> having false memories).



When I first installed Gentoo a few years ago, I think I switched from

x86 to ~x86 in the first 24 hours, for the very reason. I wanted to

use the newest versions and the "stable" stuff was so old... It seems

the majority of users are using ~arch these days.




I see it as a good thing, a sign that Gentoo is maturing beyond just being a 'ricing' distro. Its now possible to have the best of both worlds, whether you want the stability of well tested packages from ARCH, or the chance to get newer packages, but with a chance of bugs and potential breakage by using ~ARCH.


Im a happy ~ARCH user myself, and have been for a long time, however i do stick to using plain ARCH on my little server just to keep it stable and happy.

- Nick
 
Old 01-20-2009, 11:28 PM
Peter Alfredsen
 
Default

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 21:36:58 +0100
"b.n." <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:

> Mark Knecht ha scritto:
>
> > The one thing I would respectfully suggest is that you carefully
> > build your own portage overlay. My experience with Gentoo over the
> > last few years is that there is a _anxiousness_ in the portage
> > maintainer area to move newer revisions of software into portage
> > quickly and then just as quickly to remove from portage what users
> > are currently using.

@Mark
That's certainly true in the sense that we loathe maintaining
several revisions of the same software. Each Gentoo maintainer can
maintain anywhere from 1 to $BIG_NUM packages, so we strive to have in
general at most three versions in portage at any given time. We don't
really want bug reports about $old_stable if it's been fixed in a
$new_stable. We're not backport-monkeys, like Ubuntu. We do what we do
cause we like solving complex problems, interacting with the smart
people we call 'users'[1] and our fellow devs, not because "svn diff"
is our BFF. :-)

> I am usually a bit annoyed by the contrary. On an almost 1-year old
> Kubuntu (8.04 Hardy Heron) I can find packages that are just barely
> x86 stable now on Gentoo.
>
> A couple of examples I am aware of:
> Firefox 3: stable just since one month on Gentoo x86, was included in
> KB8.04 Qtiplot: 0.9.x stable and working on KB8.04, all releases ~x86
> (and a hell to compile on a stable system -still didn't manage to do
> it) in Gentoo.

I don't know about qtiplot but Firefox-3 was blocked by the fact that
there were stability problems the first many months, compared to
firefox-2. I remember random crashes, etc. Then we had a mysterious bug
where it would segfault on first start if compiled with
USE="xulrunner", i.e. using the system libxul, but not if we used the
bundled one. Then we had some problems with hardened Gentoo, Sparc
getting bus errors, etc. If you remember firefox-2 when first it came
out, it also had the same kinds of problems. I think it wasn't before
2.0.0.11 that I migrated from 1.5.

Gentoo has many arches and the more popular a package is, the more
bugreports will come, the harder it will be to mark it stable. Firefox
is especially hard to maintain because users use it so very much.

> Python releases are often behind, and not mentioning KDE 4, which is
> even default on 8.10 Kubuntu and on Gentoo was still hardmasked last
> time I checked (but probably Gentoo is just right in this respect,
> everyone keeps telling me to wait before digging into KDE 4).

Python is a special case. Portage (emerge and friends) use it, so we
always try to have as few bugs as possible in the versions that are put
into the tree. Kde 4.1 is broken, compared to 3.5.9/10. I tried it and I
don't want it. The problem we have now is that 3.5.10 is starting to
bitrot, so we'll probably *have* to mark 4.2 stable.

> I fully understand that there are good reasons for that, and that the
> meta-distribution status of Gentoo makes harder to check packages (and
> also that the Ubuntu folks wildly release unstable stuff... firefox 3
> rc in 8.04, for example). I just feel that (stable) Gentoo is
> actually a bit *behind* the average Linux distribution in its
> revisions of software.

You asked for stable, you got it. We're usually faster than Debian
stable though.

> Most importantly, I also feel that that's something new: when I first
> installed my system, more than 4 years ago, I felt it was *ahead*.

I did too, but then I was coming from Windows, so that's hardly
surprising :-)

No, seriously it didn't take long for me to go ~x86. I think it was
ati-drivers (oh noez!) and keeping them in sync with xorg-server that
drove me to it.

> I wonder if it's due just to the sheer increase of work required to
> test packages, or if there are decisions behind that (or if it's just
> me having false memories).

The amount of work has something to do with it, you (users) can help
there by filing stable requests if you see a package that you feel has
been ~arch for too long. We do react to nudges. Most of us, anyway.

/PA

[1] It wouldn't really be much fun being a dev for Gentoo if we didn't
have the bestest users evers. Srsly :-). If you look at how many bug
reports there are and how many are at least partially solved by users
before a dev gets to it, it's quite humbling. Sometimes I can spend
hours being a commit-monkey for users who've posted bugreports that
makes solving the bug a matter of fifteen minutes, tops.
 
Old 01-21-2009, 02:57 AM
"s. keeling"
 
Default

I was missing libsasl2-modules and sasl2-bin. This was helpful:

http://tribulaciones.org/docs/postfix-sasl-tls-howto/

Thanks mouss for your patience.


mouss <mouss@ml.netoyen.net>:
> s. keeling a écrit :
> > s. keeling <keeling@nucleus.com>:
> >> mouss <mouss@ml.netoyen.net>:
> >>> smtp_generic_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/generic
> >>>
> >>> == generic:
> >>> keeling@newmil.nucleus.com keeling@nucleus.com
> >
> > More clues? Again, this is Sidux on AMD64, HP Pavilion dv4.
> >
> > Jan 19 18:33:35 newmil postfix/qmgr[12263]: 4EDADBC06: from=<keeling@newmil.nucleus.com>, size=671, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
> > Jan 19 18:33:35 newmil postfix/smtp[14928]: warning: SASL authentication failure: No worthy mechs found
> > Jan 19 18:33:35 newmil postfix/smtp[14928]: 4EDADBC06: to=<keeling@nucleus.com>, relay=smtp.nucleus.com[66.18.251.14]:25, delay=0.1, delays=0.02/0/0.08/0, dsn=4.7.0, status=deferred (SASL authentication failed; cannot authenticate to server smtp.nucleus.com[66.18.251.14]: no mechanism available)
> >
>
> $ telnet smtp.nucleus.com 25
> 220 smtp.nucleus.com modusMail ESMTP Receiver
> EHLO imlil.netoyen.net
> 250-nucleus.com
> 250-SIZE 20971520
> 250-ETRN
> 250-STARTTLS
> 250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
> 250-X-IMS 5 -1
> 250-DSN
> 250-VRFY
> 250-AUTH LOGIN SCRAM-MD5 CRAM-MD5
> 250-AUTH=LOGIN
> 250 8BITMIME
> quit
> 221 2.0.0 nucleus.com closing
>
> so smtp.nucleus.com accepted LOGIN, CRAM-MD5 and SCRAM-MD5 (sigh, they
> support the non standard "LOGIN" but not the standard "PLAIN"...)
>
> Most probably, your postfix has the default:
> smtp_sasl_security_options = noplaintext, noanonymous
>
> which implies that postfix won't use cleartext passwords, thus no LOGIN
> (nor PLAIN).
>
> fortunately, "they" seem to accept STARTTLS. so enable TLS in the smtp
> client:
>
> smtp_tls_security_level = may
>
> and try again. (plain text is ok under TLS).
>
> if you can't get TLS to work, try
>
> smtp_sasl_security_options = noanonymous
>
> but this is not a very good idea, because your password will be sent in
> the clear. (note that you need to have the cyrus-sasl
> /usr/lib/sasl2/liblogin.* lib files).
>
>
> PS. The postfix-users list is a better place for such questions.
>
>


--
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*) http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html Linux Counter #80292
- - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html Please, don't Cc: me.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-21-2009, 08:04 AM
Ron Johnson
 
Default

On 01/20/2009 09:57 PM, s. keeling wrote:

I was missing libsasl2-modules and sasl2-bin. This was helpful:

http://tribulaciones.org/docs/postfix-sasl-tls-howto/



Does this mean that there is a Suggests/Recommends/Depends bug in
Postfix?


--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA

"I am not surprised, for we live long and are celebrated poopers."


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-21-2009, 05:26 PM
"s. keeling"
 
Default

Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>:
> On 01/20/2009 09:57 PM, s. keeling wrote:
> > I was missing libsasl2-modules and sasl2-bin. This was helpful:
> >
> > http://tribulaciones.org/docs/postfix-sasl-tls-howto/
>
> Does this mean that there is a Suggests/Recommends/Depends bug in
> Postfix?

*I* would not say that just yet. I'm stumbling around bumping into
the walls with this stuff, and the problem certainly could have been
my doing. The online dox on this stuff are often old/out of
date/broken. FI, one you mentioned the other day said you need
postfix-tls. That's a virtual package supplied by postfix itself.

I think the link above is talking about Sarge.


--
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*) http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html Linux Counter #80292
- - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html Please, don't Cc: me.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-21-2009, 05:46 PM
mouss
 
Default

Ron Johnson a écrit :
> On 01/20/2009 09:57 PM, s. keeling wrote:
>> I was missing libsasl2-modules and sasl2-bin. This was helpful:
>>
>> http://tribulaciones.org/docs/postfix-sasl-tls-howto/
>>

do read the official docs however:
http://www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html
http://www.postfix.org/TLS_README.html

and more generally
http://www.postfix.org/documentation.html
is the right place. These are official and thus:
- get updated
- are supported by Wietse

>
> Does this mean that there is a Suggests/Recommends/Depends bug in Postfix?
>

In postfix, no. most people don't need cyrus-sasl.

whether there is a packaging "descrepancy" in cyrus-sasl is a different
story. I am too lazy to search for the reasons why things are done this
way.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-21-2009, 06:05 PM
Ron Johnson
 
Default

On 01/21/2009 12:46 PM, mouss wrote:

Ron Johnson a écrit :

[snip]



Does this mean that there is a Suggests/Recommends/Depends bug in Postfix?



In postfix, no. most people don't need cyrus-sasl.

whether there is a packaging "descrepancy" in cyrus-sasl is a different
story. I am too lazy to search for the reasons why things are done this
way.


Silly me should have looked before I wrote, since Sid postfix
already Suggests sasl2-bin & libsasl2-modules.


--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA

"I am not surprised, for we live long and are celebrated poopers."


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-21-2009, 07:50 PM
Michael Sullivan
 
Default

On Wed, 2009-01-21 at 18:10 +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:31:36 -0600, Michael Sullivan wrote:
>
> > ('ebuild', '/', 'app-text/poppler-0.6.3-r1', 'merge') pulled in by
> > app-text/poppler required by world
>
> Why have you got poppler in world?

I don't know, but I unmerged it, and I can emerge world now.
 
Old 01-21-2009, 08:00 PM
Sergio Dicandia
 
Default

AND the attachments ... ;-)

---------------------------
No luck with DHCP ... it still doesn't give more than 4 (or 5 at best) addresses and then it freezes ....
I did the tcpdump as suggested, you can find it attached ...

Now I'm thinking to replace the DHCP server, but I need something on the server itself, or on a device (the router, maybe) since I cannot ask the teacher to:
1- start a service machine (acting as a DHCP server)
2 - wait until it's up&running
3 - start the server
4 - start the TCs

Way too tricky for people used to switch on a general button and have all the PCs running (OK, WindowsME, but)
What about a router ?
I also need to assign fixed IPs to specific MAC adddresses to be able to use iTalc ...

:-(* I'm very sad about this
....

--------------------




10:53:44.607037 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 548
10:53:44.607793 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
10:53:46.666456 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 548
10:53:46.666644 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
10:53:49.144202 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 548
10:53:49.144411 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
10:53:51.204159 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 548
10:53:51.204364 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
10:53:54.893507 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:0b, length 548
10:53:54.893716 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
10:53:56.879436 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 271
10:53:56.879628 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.1.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:53:56.879845 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 283
10:53:56.879961 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.1.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:53:56.953445 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:0b, length 548
10:53:56.953568 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
10:53:57.955509 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 283
10:53:57.955710 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.1.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:54:00.664466 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:bf, length 548
10:54:00.664680 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
10:54:01.243267 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 271
10:54:01.243451 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.2.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:54:01.244279 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 283
10:54:01.244395 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.2.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:54:02.243319 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 283
10:54:02.243516 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.2.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:54:02.724395 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:bf, length 548
10:54:02.724579 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
10:54:07.143094 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:0b, length 271
10:54:07.143287 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.3.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:54:07.143517 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:0b, length 283
10:54:07.143633 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.3.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:54:07.343918 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:b9, length 548
10:54:07.344051 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
10:54:09.347284 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:0b, length 283
10:54:09.347499 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.3.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:54:09.403865 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:b9, length 548
10:54:09.404051 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
10:54:15.002160 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:bf, length 271
10:54:15.002394 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.4.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:54:15.004538 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:bf, length 283
10:54:15.004695 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.4.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:54:16.209999 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d1:59, length 548
10:54:16.210332 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
10:54:18.269914 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d1:59, length 548
10:54:18.270099 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
10:54:19.206566 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:bf, length 283
10:54:19.206769 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.4.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:54:29.479319 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d1:59, length 271
10:54:29.941160 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:b9, length 271
10:54:30.143568 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.6.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:54:31.041266 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:b9, length 271
10:54:33.141502 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:b9, length 271
10:54:33.141643 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d1:59, length 271
10:54:36.924349 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:95, length 548
10:54:38.677969 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:aa, length 548
10:54:38.775796 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d1:59, length 271
10:54:38.775934 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:b9, length 271
10:54:39.011780 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:95, length 548
10:54:40.737909 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:aa, length 548
10:54:42.480133 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:1b:eb, length 548
10:54:43.076780 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:95, length 548
10:54:44.540070 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:1b:eb, length 548
10:54:44.802860 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:aa, length 548
10:54:45.151559 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.5.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:54:45.151762 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:b9, length 283
10:54:47.248243 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d1:59, length 271
10:54:47.320653 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:19, length 548
10:54:48.605002 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:1b:eb, length 548
10:54:48.703228 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:b9, length 283
10:54:49.380624 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:19, length 548
10:54:51.151846 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:95, length 548
10:54:52.877830 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:aa, length 548
10:54:53.445630 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:19, length 548
10:54:53.693000 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:43, length 548
10:54:55.662076 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:5c, length 548
10:54:55.752954 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:43, length 548
10:54:56.679931 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:1b:eb, length 548
10:54:57.722030 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:5c, length 548
10:54:59.817945 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:43, length 548
10:55:00.163284 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.5.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:55:01.520698 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:19, length 548
10:55:01.787003 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:5c, length 548
10:55:07.892981 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:43, length 548
10:55:09.862017 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:5c, length 548
10:55:15.175299 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.5.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:55:20.045314 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d1:59, length 271
10:55:45.195283 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.6.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
10:55:45.195484 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d1:59, length 283
10:56:05.211298 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
10:56:08.308444 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d1:59, length 283
10:56:30.242329 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
10:56:55.262270 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 192.168.1.6.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 303
11:01:08.401160 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 548
11:01:08.401663 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
11:01:10.461106 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 548
11:01:10.461318 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
11:01:12.490478 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 548
11:01:12.490646 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
11:01:14.550434 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 548
11:01:14.550612 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
11:01:17.755356 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:0b, length 548
11:01:17.755552 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
11:01:19.815296 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:0b, length 548
11:01:20.486305 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
11:01:22.996180 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:bf, length 548
11:01:23.127818 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 271
11:01:24.227919 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 271
11:01:25.083570 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:bf, length 548
11:01:25.446012 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 271
11:01:26.001915 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:b9, length 548
11:01:28.061866 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:b9, length 548
11:01:28.061998 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 271
11:01:29.148493 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:bf, length 548
11:01:29.148624 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 271
11:01:30.613575 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:0b, length 271
11:01:31.282145 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d1:59, length 548
11:01:32.126825 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:b9, length 548
11:01:32.126951 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 271
11:01:33.369521 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d1:59, length 548
11:01:33.369649 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 271
11:01:33.369676 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:0b, length 271
11:01:37.223398 IP 0.0.0.0.611:01:08.401160 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 548
11:01:08.401663 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
11:01:10.461106 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 548
11:01:10.461318 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
11:01:12.490478 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 548
11:01:12.490646 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
11:01:14.550434 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 548
11:01:14.550612 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
11:01:17.755356 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:0b, length 548
11:01:17.755552 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
11:01:19.815296 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:0b, length 548
11:01:20.486305 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
11:01:22.996180 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:bf, length 548
11:01:23.127818 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 271
11:01:24.227919 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 271
11:01:25.083570 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:bf, length 548
11:01:25.446012 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 271
11:01:26.001915 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:b9, length 548
11:01:28.061866 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:b9, length 548
11:01:28.061998 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 271
11:01:29.148493 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:bf, length 548
11:01:29.148624 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 271
11:01:30.613575 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:0b, length 271
11:01:31.282145 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d1:59, length 548
11:01:32.126825 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:b9, length 548
11:01:32.126951 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 271
11:01:33.369521 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d1:59, length 548
11:01:33.369649 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 271
11:01:33.369676 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:0b, length 271
11:01:37.223398 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:bf, length 548
11:01:37.434412 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d1:59, length 548
11:01:40.201808 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:88:d8:b9, length 548
11:01:40.201934 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:0b, length 271
11:01:40.503330 IP 192.168.1.200.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
11:01:40.503553 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:09, length 271
11:01:41.919866 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:95, length 548
11:01:41.920003 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:86, length 271
11:01:43.979833 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:95, length 548
11:01:44.699259 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:03:47:75:94:aa, length 548
11:01:45.509262 IP 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOT--
edubuntu-users mailing list
edubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/edubuntu-users
 
Old 01-22-2009, 10:37 PM
Pierre Schmitz
 
Default

Hi everybody,

today I uploaded the so called "first try" of 4.2 into [testing]. Those
packages are not the final one yet, but damn close. There are only two known
upstream showstoppers; which will be fixed by new packages soon. See
http://bugs.kde.org/buglist.cgi?keywords=kde-4.2.0-blocker.

On our site only mysql is blocking a release to [extra]:
http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/12798 In addition to this kde-l10n-et seems
broken.

So please take the chance and check those packages. An update from 4.1 should
be quite smooth. And even if you hated KDE 4.1, give 4.2 a try; it really
rocks. :-)

If you notice any regression, showstopper or problems during the update,
please report them.

Packages for x86_64 should be available on your favourite mirror soon; Andrea
will build i66 packages tomorrow.

Greetings,

Pierre

--

Pierre Schmitz


Clemens-August-Straße 76
53115 Bonn

Telefon 0228 9716608
Mobil 0160 95269831
Jabber pierre@jabber.archlinux.de
WWW http://www.archlinux.de
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:54 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org