[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Removal from Slackware 12 ??
- To: checkinstall-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Removal from Slackware 12 ??
- From: Lawrence Toal <let02do@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 13:40:06 -0500
- Delivered-to: mailing list checkinstall-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <200708022256.44902.let02do@xxxxxxx>
- Mailing-list: contact checkinstall-list-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <200708022256.44902.let02do@xxxxxxx>
- User-agent: KMail/1.9.4
On Thursday 02 August 2007 23:53, Felipe Sanchez wrote:
> Some people have reported success using checkinstall-1.5.3 which may
> suggest that the fstrans code is to blame.
> I started looking into this only yesterday. I'll keep the list posted.
> If anyone has any info which can be of use, please share ;-)
Perhaps you've already seen it, but there is this thread:
I found particularly interesting Henrik Carlqvist's tests and another
poster's (kinslerp) reminiscence in response to "root":
>>>root <NoEMail DeleteThis @home.org> wrote:
>> > My 1.5.3 version does not work. Something is really wrong with tar
> >> and that may be the problem.
>> I went back to the previous version of tar and my checkinstall works
>I distinctly recall (but not sure from where: here, several years ago?)
>that the problem with checkinstall is that it assumes a newer version
>of tar than than (er) used by default in Slackware.
>E.g. "grep tar /sbin/installpkg" returns the line
>echo "WARNING: pkgtools are unstable with tar > 1.13."
Slack 11 used tar-1.13, Slack 12 uses tar-1.16.1. Makes me want to
tinker a bit myself, but here Slack 12 lives on a box whose video card
died. :-( Oh, well--its Ebay time again....