Search Results

Search found 27637 results on 1106 pages for 'source packages'.

Page 1/1106 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Packages having unmet dependencies: Broken Packages

    - by Akarsh
    When I try to install postgresql i get the following error: sudo apt-get install postgresql-client Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: libc6-dev : Breaks: gcc-4.4 (< 4.4.6-4) but 4.4.4-14 ubuntu5 is to be installed E: Broken packages How do I resolve this issue to install postgresql?

    Read the article

  • Getting a Database into Source Control

    - by Grant Fritchey
    For any number of reasons, from simple auditing, to change tracking, to automated deployment, to integration with application development processes, you’re going to want to place your database into source control. Using Red Gate SQL Source Control this process is extremely simple. SQL Source Control works within your SQL Server Management Studio (SSMS) interface.  This means you can work with your databases in any way that you’re used to working with them. If you prefer scripts to using the GUI, not a problem. If you prefer using the GUI to having to learn T-SQL, again, that’s fine. After installing SQL Source Control, this is what you’ll see when you open SSMS:   SQL Source Control is now a direct piece of the SSMS environment. The key point initially is that I currently don’t have a database selected. You can even see that in the SQL Source Control window where it shows, in red, “No database selected – select a database in Object Explorer.” If I expand my Databases list in the Object Explorer, you’ll be able to immediately see which databases have been integrated with source control and which have not. There are visible differences between the databases as you can see here:   To add a database to source control, I first have to select it. For this example, I’m going to add the AdventureWorks2012 database to an instance of the SVN source control software (I’m using uberSVN). When I click on the AdventureWorks2012 database, the SQL Source Control screen changes:   I’m going to need to click on the “Link database to source control” text which will open up a window for connecting this database to the source control system of my choice.  You can pick from the default source control systems on the left, or define one of your own. I also have to provide the connection string for the location within the source control system where I’ll be storing my database code. I set these up in advance. You’ll need two. One for the main set of scripts and one for special scripts called Migrations that deal with different kinds of changes between versions of the code. Migrations help you solve problems like having to create or modify data in columns as part of a structural change. I’ll talk more about them another day. Finally, I have to determine if this is an isolated environment that I’m going to be the only one use, a dedicated database. Or, if I’m sharing the database in a shared environment with other developers, a shared database.  The main difference is, under a dedicated database, I will need to regularly get any changes that other developers have made from source control and integrate it into my database. While, under a shared database, all changes for all developers are made at the same time, which means you could commit other peoples work without proper testing. It all depends on the type of environment you work within. But, when it’s all set, it will look like this: SQL Source Control will compare the results between the empty folders in source control and the database, AdventureWorks2012. You’ll get a report showing exactly the list of differences and you can choose which ones will get checked into source control. Each of the database objects is scripted individually. You’ll be able to modify them later in the same way. Here’s the list of differences for my new database:   You can select/deselect all the objects or each object individually. You also get a report showing the differences between what’s in the database and what’s in source control. If there was already a database in source control, you’d only see changes to database objects rather than every single object. You can see that the database objects can be sorted by name, by type, or other choices. I’m going to add a comment such as “Initial creation of database in source control.” And then click on the Commit button which will put all the objects in my database into the source control system. That’s all it takes to get the objects into source control initially. Now is when things can get fun with breaking changes to code, automated deployments, unit testing and all the rest.

    Read the article

  • I cannot solve the "Install these packages without verification" problem

    - by Yonatan Orlev
    I Googled and Googled and I just cannot find a solution to this problem: sudo apt-get install <whatever> Gives me: WARNING: The following packages cannot be authenticated! and Install these packages without verification [y/N]? I cannot find a decent solution. The closest I got was to run: sudo apt-get install debian-keyring debian-archive-keyring But then, even thought, and against my good judgment I agreed to install the package without confirmation, I get: (I replaced http with XXXX because of forum limitations). Install these packages without verification [y/N]? y Err XXXX://il.archive.ubuntu.com gutsy/universe debian-archive-keyring 2007.02.19-0.1 404 Not Found Err XXXX://il.archive.ubuntu.com gutsy/universe debian-keyring 2005.05.28 404 Not Found Failed to fetch XXXX://il.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/universe/d/debian-archive-keyring/debian-archive-keyring_2007.02.19-0.1_all.deb 404 Not Found Failed to fetch XXXX://il.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/universe/d/debian-keyring/debian-keyring_2005.05.28_all.deb 404 Not Found E: Unable to fetch some archives, maybe run apt-get update or try with --fix-missing? Trying to run apt-get update also does not help: I get tons of "404 Not Found" errors. Can someone please direct me to a good solution to this problem? I cannot understand why this issue is not better documented. There must be a simple solution which allows me to update my list of sources or whatever.

    Read the article

  • Does it matter to you that a software is "available source" but not "open source"

    - by ccpod
    You probably know the list of open source licenses officially approved by the OSI. Most notably I guess would be the GPL, MIT, [insert your favorite license here]. I recently ran into a project which although was open source (the creator made all source code available), was not officially open source under one of those official licenses. It released the source, but made no promise to release the source in the future. It allowed modification suggestions, but made no promises to accept patches and disallowed external distribution of externally-patched versions. It allowed the use of the software in commercial or paid projects, but disallowed the sale of the software itself. I suppose it could be called "available source" not open source as we like to think of it. I can see why the management team of a company wouldn't want to do business with this software. They can't fork it, they can't sell it, they can't create their own version of the software and distribute it or sell it. But would it matter to you as part of a software engineering team who's just using this software? I can still get my work done with it, I can use it in a project for which I'm paid (but I can't sell the software itself, which I'm not in the business of doing anyway), and I can make changes to the code to make it behave differently for my needs (but I can't make those modifications public), and if I do want those modifications officially made available to others, the approval is up to the project itself and they choose whether to incorporate them in an official release or not. So we know that a company that wants to base its business on this "available source" software can't do that, but as someone from the software engineering team, would those differences matter to you or do they seem less relevant? Curious what others think of this.

    Read the article

  • Does it matter to you that a software is "available source" but not "open source"

    - by ccpod
    You probably know the list of open source licenses officially approved by the OSI. Most notably I guess would be the GPL, MIT, [insert your favorite license here]. I recently ran into a project which although was open source (the creator made all source code available), was not officially open source under one of those official licenses. It released the source, but made no promise to release the source in the future. It allowed modification suggestions, but made no promises to accept patches and disallowed external distribution of externally-patched versions. It allowed the use of the software in commercial or paid projects, but disallowed the sale of the software itself. I suppose it could be called "available source" not open source as we like to think of it. I can see why the management team of a company wouldn't want to do business with this software. They can't fork it, they can't sell it, they can't create their own version of the software and distribute it or sell it. But would it matter to you as part of a software engineering team who's just using this software? I can still get my work done with it, I can use it in a project for which I'm paid (but I can't sell the software itself, which I'm not in the business of doing anyway), and I can make changes to the code to make it behave differently for my needs (but I can't make those modifications public), and if I do want those modifications officially made available to others, the approval is up to the project itself and they choose whether to incorporate them in an official release or not. So we know that a company that wants to base its business on this "available source" software can't do that, but as someone from the software engineering team, would those differences matter to you or do they seem less relevant? Curious what others think of this.

    Read the article

  • What are some examples of open source software that has turned into closed source software? [on hold]

    - by Verrier
    As the title says... can anyone think of any software that has made the transition from open source to closed source / proprietary? These could include software owned by the same company who decided to take a once open source offering and turn it into closed source... but I'm really looking for some examples of companies who developed a commercial closed source product off of an existing open source one (obviously with a permissive license).

    Read the article

  • FOSS Development: Who develops the OS-specific packages?

    - by achristi
    I have a couple of FOSS projects. They can be a bit of a pain to get running unless you've got dependencies in place already, which I figure is par for the course for FOSS projects. We know that each free operating system out there has its own package management systems. A few of them, such as homebrew on Mac OS or AUR on Arch linux are very friendly to community contributions. What I am wondering is, who exactly is expected to contribute packages? Primarily I am concerned with the case of small or developing projects, since it's pretty standard for the big projects to be put in there by the OS maintainers. From my perspective, it is something of a chicken-egg problem, because your software will not make its way into a package system if it does not have users, and it is less likely to gain users if it is not easy to install and use. For the sake of discussion, let's assume that the software in question is actually legitimately useful. I can see where people could create crapware or spam and that should obviously be kept out of any package system. So, in summary, whose job is this? Is it spammy for a FOSS software dev to put his own work into various OS package repositories?

    Read the article

  • sudo apt-get update problem

    - by Jeon
    I have a problem with sudo apt-get update that I can't seem to fix and It's causing problems with alot of installations I want to do. I run Ubuntu 12.04. Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise InRelease Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates InRelease Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports InRelease Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-security InRelease Get:1 http://repository.spotify.com stable InRelease [2,979 B] Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net precise InRelease Ign http://extras.ubuntu.com precise InRelease Ign http://archive.canonical.com precise InRelease Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net precise InRelease Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net precise InRelease Ign http://repository.spotify.com stable InRelease Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise Release.gpg Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates Release.gpg Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports Release.gpg Ign http://repository.spotify.com stable/non-free amd64 Packages/DiffIndex Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net precise Release.gpg Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net precise Release.gpg Hit http://archive.canonical.com precise Release.gpg Hit http://extras.ubuntu.com precise Release.gpg Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-security Release.gpg Ign http://repository.spotify.com stable/non-free i386 Packages/DiffIndex Ign http://repository.spotify.com stable/non-free TranslationIndex Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net precise Release.gpg Hit http://archive.canonical.com precise Release Hit http://extras.ubuntu.com precise Release Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise Release Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates Release Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net precise Release Hit http://archive.canonical.com precise/partner amd64 Packages Hit http://extras.ubuntu.com precise/main Sources Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports Release Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-security Release Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net precise Release Hit http://archive.canonical.com precise/partner i386 Packages Ign http://archive.canonical.com precise/partner TranslationIndex Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net precise Release Hit http://extras.ubuntu.com precise/main amd64 Packages Hit http://extras.ubuntu.com precise/main i386 Packages Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise/main TranslationIndex Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise/multiverse TranslationIndex Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise/restricted TranslationIndex Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main Sources Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main amd64 Packages Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main i386 Packages Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main TranslationIndex Ign http://extras.ubuntu.com precise/main TranslationIndex Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise/universe TranslationIndex Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main Sources Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main amd64 Packages Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main i386 Packages Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main TranslationIndex Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main Sources Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main amd64 Packages Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main i386 Packages Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main TranslationIndex Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/main TranslationIndex Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/multiverse TranslationIndex Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/restricted TranslationIndex Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/universe TranslationIndex Hit http://repository.spotify.com stable/non-free amd64 Packages Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/main TranslationIndex Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/multiverse TranslationIndex Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/restricted TranslationIndex Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/universe TranslationIndex Hit http://repository.spotify.com stable/non-free i386 Packages Ign http://archive.canonical.com precise/partner Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/main TranslationIndex Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/multiverse TranslationIndex Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/restricted TranslationIndex Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/universe TranslationIndex Ign http://repository.spotify.com stable/non-free Translation-en_US Ign http://archive.canonical.com precise/partner Translation-en Ign http://repository.spotify.com stable/non-free Translation-en Ign http://extras.ubuntu.com precise/main Translation-en_US Ign http://extras.ubuntu.com precise/main Translation-en Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main Translation-en Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main Translation-en Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net precise/main Translation-en Err http://ftp.availo.se precise/main Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise/restricted Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise/universe Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise/multiverse Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise/main amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise/restricted amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise/universe amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise/multiverse amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise/main i386 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise/restricted i386 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise/universe i386 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise/multiverse i386 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/main Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/restricted Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/universe Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/multiverse Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/main amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/restricted amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/universe amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/multiverse amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/main i386 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/restricted i386 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/universe i386 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/multiverse i386 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/main Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/restricted Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/universe Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/multiverse Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/main amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/restricted amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/universe amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/multiverse amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/main i386 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/restricted i386 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/universe i386 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/multiverse i386 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/main Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/restricted Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/universe Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/multiverse Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/main amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/restricted amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/universe amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/multiverse amd64 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/main i386 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/restricted i386 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/universe i386 Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/multiverse i386 Packages 404 Not Found Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise/main Translation-en Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise/multiverse Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise/multiverse Translation-en Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise/restricted Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise/restricted Translation-en Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise/universe Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise/universe Translation-en Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/main Translation-en Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/multiverse Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/multiverse Translation-en Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/restricted Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/restricted Translation-en Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/universe Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-updates/universe Translation-en Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/main Translation-en Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/multiverse Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/multiverse Translation-en Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/restricted Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/restricted Translation-en Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/universe Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-backports/universe Translation-en Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/main Translation-en Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/multiverse Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/multiverse Translation-en Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/restricted Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/restricted Translation-en Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/universe Translation-en_US Ign http://ftp.availo.se precise-security/universe Translation-en Fetched 2,979 B in 9s (328 B/s) W: GPG error: http://repository.spotify.com stable InRelease: The following signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY 082CCEDF94558F59 W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise/main/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise/restricted/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise/universe/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise/multiverse/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise/main/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise/restricted/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise/universe/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise/multiverse/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise/main/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise/restricted/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise/universe/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-updates/main/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-updates/restricted/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-updates/universe/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-updates/multiverse/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-updates/main/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-updates/restricted/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-updates/universe/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-updates/multiverse/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-updates/main/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-updates/restricted/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-updates/universe/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-updates/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-backports/main/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-backports/restricted/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-backports/universe/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-backports/multiverse/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-backports/main/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-backports/restricted/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-backports/universe/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-backports/multiverse/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-backports/main/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-backports/restricted/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-backports/universe/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-backports/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-security/main/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-security/restricted/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-security/universe/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-security/multiverse/source/Sources 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-security/main/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-security/restricted/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-security/universe/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-security/multiverse/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-security/main/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-security/restricted/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-security/universe/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ftp.availo.se/ubuntu/dists/precise-security/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found E: Some index files failed to download. They have been ignored, or old ones used instead. I would appreciate a fix to this. Thank you for the help.

    Read the article

  • Package operation failed when updating 12.04

    - by Gausstein
    Whenever I try to update 12.04, I get the "Package Operation Failed" message. I haven't been able to update my system. In the "Details" section it says: installArchives() failed: Extracting templates from packages: 30%% Extracting templates from packages: 61%% Extracting templates from packages: 91%% Extracting templates from packages: 100%% Preconfiguring packages ... Extracting templates from packages: 30%% Extracting templates from packages: 61%% Extracting templates from packages: 91%% Extracting templates from packages: 100%% Preconfiguring packages ... Extracting templates from packages: 30%% Extracting templates from packages: 61%% Extracting templates from packages: 91%% Extracting templates from packages: 100%% Preconfiguring packages ... Extracting templates from packages: 30%% Extracting templates from packages: 61%% Extracting templates from packages: 91%% Extracting templates from packages: 100%% Preconfiguring packages ... dpkg: error: parsing file '/var/lib/dpkg/available' near line 42150 package 'x11-apps': blank line in value of field 'Description' Error in function:

    Read the article

  • Databases in Source Control

    - by Grant Fritchey
    I’ve been working as a database professional for quite a long time. But originally, I was a developer. And I loved being a developer. There was this constant feedback loop of a job well done, your code compiled and it ran. Every time this happened successfully, you’d check it into source control. These days you have to add another step; the code passed all the tests, unit, line, regression, qa, whatever, then into source control it goes. As a matter of fact, when I first made the jump from developer to DBA/database developer/database professional, source control was the one thing I couldn’t believe was missing from the DBA toolbox. Come to find out, source control was only the beginning of what was missing from your standard DBAs set of skills. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not disrespecting the DBA. They’re focused where they should be, on your production data. But there has to be a method for developing applications that include databases and the database side of that development and deployment process has long been lacking. This lack of development and deployment methodologies is a part of what has given rise to some of the wackier implementations of Object Relational Mapping tools, the NoSQL movement, and some of the other foul cursing that is directed towards databases, DBAs, and database development by application developers. Some of that is well earned. A lot isn’t. But it is a fact that database professionals, in general, do not have as sophisticated a model for managing development and deployment as application developers do. We could charge out and start trying to come up with our own standards and methods. I’m sure people have done exactly that. However, I’m lazy, and not terribly bright. Rather than try to invent a whole new process, I’m going to look to my developer roots and choose instead to emulate the developers. They’re sitting over there across the hall from me working with SCRUM/Agile/Waterfall/Object Driven/Feature Driven/Test Driven development processes that they’ve been polishing for years. What if I just started working on database development the same way they work on code development? Win! Ah, but now I have to have a mechanism for treating my database like application code. First, I need a method for getting it into source control. That’s where Red Gate’s SQL Source Control comes into the picture. SQL Source Control works within SQL Server Management Studio to connect your database objects up to the source control system of your choice. Right out of the box SQL Source Control can link to TFS, SVN or Vault. With a little work you can connect it to Git or just about any other source control system. With the ability to get my database into source control, a lot of possibilities for more direct integration with the application development teams open up.

    Read the article

  • Build .deb package from source, without installing it

    - by Mechanical snail
    Suppose I have an installer program or source tarball for some program I want to install. (There is no Debian package available.) First I want to create a .deb package out of it, in order to be able to cleanly remove the installed program in the future (see Uninstalling application built from source, If I build a package from source how can I uninstall or remove completely?). Also, installing using a package prevents it from clobbering files from other packages, which cannot be guaranteed if you run the installer or sudo make install. Checkinstall From reading the answers there and elsewhere, I gather the usual solution is to use checkinstall to build the package. Unfortunately, it seems checkinstall does not prevent make install from clobbering system files from other packages. For example, according to Reverting problems caused by checkinstall with gcc build: I created a Debian package from the install using sudo checkinstall -D make install. [...] I removed it using Synaptic Package Manager. As it turns out, [removing] the package checkinstall created from make install tried to remove every single file the installation process touched, including shared gcc libraries like /lib64/libgcc_s.so. I then tried to tell checkinstall to build the package without installing it, in the hope of bypassing the issue. I created a dummy Makefile: install: echo "Bogus" > /bin/qwertyuiop and ran sudo checkinstall --install=no. The file /bin/qwertyuiop was created, even though the package was not installed. In my case, I do not trust the installer / make install to not overwrite system files, so this use of checkinstall is ruled out. How can I build the package, without installing it or letting it touch system files? Is it possible to run Checkinstall in a fakechrooted debootstrap environment to achieve this? Preferably the build should be done as a normal user rather than root, which would prevent the process from overwriting system files if it goes wrong.

    Read the article

  • MUD source code

    - by Tchalvak
    I haven't been able to find a lot of the old, open source mud source codes. I find the way they did things very applicable to text-based/browser based games, and I'd love to be able to skim through parts of 'em for inspiration. For instance, we have this huge list of muds and the relationships between them, but little by way of access to source code. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUD_trees Often (I'm looking at you, dikumud, http://www.dikumud.com/links.aspx ) the sites of the mud itself doesn't even have a working link to the source. https://github.com/alexmchale/merc-mud has a copy of merc that I found, which certainly contains other works within it's history, but the pickings seems sparse. Does anyone have better resources for gaining access to MUD source code than these?

    Read the article

  • What are some ramifications of open source software turning into closed source software? [on hold]

    - by Verrier
    If a company takes a permissively licensed open source application and then develops a closed source application from that by reworking extensive parts of the application, adding new features and applying bug fixes... Ignoring any license requirements... How does the transition happen and what can be done to prevent it beyond choosing a difference license? What are the (ethical or social) responsibilities for the company? (For example: Giving back to the open source project would be the ethical thing to do) If the open source version and closed source version are both available, how does the competition affect either product? Are there any examples of companies or products that have done this (either successfully or unsuccessfully) in the past? What was the community attitude toward those projects?

    Read the article

  • Choice of open source license for some components, closed source for others

    - by Peter Serwylo
    G'day, I am working on a set of multiplayer games, where different games play against each other (e.g. you play a Tetris clone, I play an Asteroids clone, but we are both competing against each other). All the games would be based on the same underlying framework written specifically for this project. I am struggling to comprehend how I would license this so that: The underlying framework is open source, so other people can create new games based on it. Some games built on the framework are open source Other games are closed source The goal is to have two bundles on something like the Android market: One free and open source package which has a collection of games Another "premium" (although I dislike that word) paid package which has a different collection of games. Usually I am fond of permissive licenses such as MIT/BSD, however I would prefer something more in the vein of the GPL for this. This is because for software such as the snes-9x SNES emulator, which is a great piece of software, there is a ton of poor quality versions being sold, whereas it would be preferable if there was just one authoritative version which was always kept up to date, and distributed for free. If the underlying framework was GPL'd, would I be able to build closed source games on top of it? Thanks for your input.

    Read the article

  • Open Source Survey: Oracle Products on Top

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    Oracle continues to work with the open source community to bring the most innovative and productive software to market (more). Oracle products received the most votes in several key categories of the 2010 Linux Journal Reader's Choice Awards. With over 12,000 technologists reporting, these product earned top spots: Best Office Suite: OpenOffice.org Best Single Office Program: OpenOffice.org Writer Best Database: MySQL Best Virtualization Solution: VirtualBox "As the leading open source technology and service provider, Oracle continues to work with the community stakeholders to rapidly innovate many open source products for use in fully tested production environments," says Edward Screven, Oracle's chief corporate architect. "Supporting open source is important to Oracle and our customers, and we continue to invest in it." According to a recent report by the Linux Foundation, Oracle is one of the top ten contributors to the Linux Kernel. Oracle also contributes millions of lines of code to these important projects: OpenJDK: 7,002,579 Eclipse: 1,800,000 (#3 in active committers) MySQL: 5,073,113 NetBeans: 7,870,446 JSF: 701,980 Apache MyFaces Trinidad: 1,316,840 Hudson: 1,209,779 OpenOffice.org: 7,500,000

    Read the article

  • Dilemma for growing a project: Open source volunteer developers VS closed source paid / revshare developers? [closed]

    - by giorgio79
    I am trying to grow my project, and I am vaccillating between some examples. Some options seem to be: 1. open sourcing the project to draw volunteer developers. Pros This would mean anyone can try and make some money off the code that would motivate them to contribute back and grow the project. Cons Existing bigger could easily copy and paste my work so far. They can also replicate without having access to the code, but that would take more time. I also thought of using AGPL license, but again, code can still be copied without redistribution. After all, enforcing a license costs a lot of money, and I cannot just say to a possible copycat that it seems you copied my code, show me what you got. 2. Keep the project closed source, but create some kind of a developer program where they get revshare Pros I keep the main rights for the project, but still generate interest by creating a developer program. Noone can copy code easily, just with some considerable effort, but make contributions easy as a breeze. I am also seeing many companies just open source a part of their projects, like Acquia does not open source its multisite setup, or github does not open source some of its core business. Cons Less attention from open source committed devs. Conclusion So option 2 seems the most secure, but would love some feedback.

    Read the article

  • going from closed-source to open-source [closed]

    - by mspoerr
    I am thinking of releasing the source code of my application (Freeware at the moment). It is written in C++ with VisualStudio 2008 and all used 3rd-party libs are free or open-source and platform independent. The idea to release the source-code is very old, but till now I did not want to show the code because I am not sure if it is nice/well designed (I am not a professional developer), but the application is growing and help would be very welcome, but I want to keep control... What do I need to consider? Is there any best practice for this scenario? The code itself is one thing, but there is much more like license, documentation, project settings, 3rd party libs, platform (Sourceforge, other?)

    Read the article

  • User Productivity Kit - Powerful Packages (Part 2)

    - by [email protected]
    In my first post on packages I described what a package is and how it can be used. I also started explaining some of the considerations that should be taken into account when determining how to arrange your packages. The first is when the files are interrelated and depend on one another such as an HTML file and it's graphics. A second consideration is how the files are used in your outlines. Let's say you're using a dozen Word doc files. You could place them all in a single package or put each Word doc file in a separate package but what's the right thing to do? There are several factors that will influence your decision. To understand the first, let me explain a function of UPK publishing. Take an outline in UPK that has an attachment (concept, frame link, or hyperlink) that points to a file in a package. When you publish this outline, the publishing engine will determine that there is a link to a file in the package and copy the contents of the package to the publishing destination directory. This is done to ensure that any interrelated files are kept together. For the situation where you have an HTML file with links to number of graphics files, this is a good thing. If, however, the package has a dozen unrelated Word doc files and you link to only one of them, all dozen Word documents will be copied to the publishing destination directory.  Whether or not this is a good thing is dependent on two things. First, are all of the files in the package used in the outline that you're publishing? Take an outline that includes links to all of the Word documents in that dozen document package I described earlier. For this situation, you may choose to keep all the files in a single package for convenience. A second consideration is how your organization leverages reuse in UPK. In this context, I'm referring to the link style of reuse such as when you link to the same topic from multiple UPK outlines and changes to the topic appear in both places. Take an example where you have the earlier mentioned dozen Word document package and an outline with a dozen topics in it. Each topic has an attachment pointing to one of the Word documents in the package (frame link, concept, etc.) If you're only publishing this outline, the single package probably works fine but what if you're reusing one of these topics in another outline? As I explained earlier, linking to one file in the package will result in all files in the package being copied to your published output. In this example, linking to one topic in the first outline will result in all dozen Word documents being copied to the published output. This may result in files in the output that you don't want there for business or size reasons. This is a situation in which you should consider placing each of the Word documents in it's own separate package. With each document in it's own package, that link to a single document will result in only that single package and single Word document being copied to the published output. In my last post I had described that packages are documents in the UPK library. When using the multi-user version of the UPK Developer you can leverage standard library capabilities for managing the files in these packages during the development process - capabilities such as check in / check out, history, etc. When structuring your packages take into consideration how the authors are going to be adding, modifying and deleting files from the packages. A single package is a single document in the UPK library. Like any other document in the library, a single user can check out the package and edit it at a time. If you have a large number of files in a single package and these must be modified by many users, you need to consider whether this will cause problems as multiple users compete to update the same package. If the files don't depend on each other consider placing the files in separate packages to reduce contention. I hope you've enjoyed these two posts on how you can leverage the power of packages in your content. In summary, consider the following when structuring your packages: Is the asset a single, standalone file or a set of files that depend on each other? Will all the files always be used together in a single outline or may only some of the files be needed based on how the content is reused across multiple outlines? Will multiple developers need to update the files in a single package or should you break it into multiple packages to reduce contention when checking out the document? We'd like to hear from you on how you're using packages in your content. Please add your comments below! Thank you and I hope these two posts have given you additional insights into how to use packages in your content and structure them for efficient use. John Zaums Senior Director, Product Development Oracle User Productivity Kit

    Read the article

  • Open Source vs. Closed Source? Which one to choose? [closed]

    - by Rafal Chmiel
    So far, I was always creating open-source applications (or didn't publish them at all) because it was free for me to create a new CodePlex project, and upload everything. Couple of days ago I started wandering what kind of apps should I make, closed or open source. I can see "cons" and "pros" in both such as the ones below: Open Source: Pro, free project hosting (CodePlex is excellent for .NET app updates. ClickOnce etc) Pro, free help such as developers and designers Con, people can get your source code and (sometimes) use some of your code in their apps and make money Con, companies such as Microsoft, Twitter or Tumblr won't be looking forward in buying your project (like for example Twitter bought TweetDeck - TweetDeck being a closed source AIR application, of course) Closed Source: Pro, it's harder for people to copy your idea without the source code Pro, you're more likely to get acquired/bought by companies Con, no free hosting - you have to have a website to do so (not good for updates) Con, no free help What do you think? What do you think I should choose?

    Read the article

  • How to install packages without internet connection

    - by user114874
    I'm just beginner to linux operating system I have following doubts 1.Now i am using ubuntu 10.10 version i dont have net connection in my home So how can i install packages manually for ex: if me and my friend have same version and same hardware config if he installed installed all packages in his laptop can i install all his packages by copy packages from his lap to mine ?? if there is a way then how to do it?? Thx guys in advance..... :)

    Read the article

  • Couldn't find package - But package is listed in the Packages file

    - by Chris
    (Quoted items are redacted elements) I am using a private repository and an currently trying to repackage some packages 3rd-party packages. I extract the package, make a few modifications (just the control files to fit with company policy - though sometimes file install locations though not in this case) and repackage (and usually rename). Normally I copy the files into a new blank debhelper project and reconstruct the package, however, with a recent one I attempting to convert and some libraries and stuff aren't linking properly (I did copy the postinst, postrm, and preinst files along with all DEDIAN files exactly), the original package worked, but my repackage doesn't, despite providing the same files in the same locations and the same postinst and preinst. So I was attempting to just modify the current packages control files (as the original package is not very good and will not list in our repository and getting a better one from the 3rd party is not an option). I also renamed the package. I did the following: dpkg-deb -R "directory" Modify DEBIAN/control dpkg-deb -b "directory" "package name I want" I did this and put it in our repository. The package shows up in the "Packages" file on the repository and running apt-get update on the client side shows the package in: /var/lib/apt/lists/"server"_"location"_Packages However when I do an apt-get install on the package name (as listed in the Packages file - I did a copy paste) it says it can't find the package. Same with an apt-cache search The Packages listings is as follow (name redacted): Package: "package name" Priority: extra Section: unknown Maintainer: "maintainer" Architecture: any Version: 1.0-lucid5 Depends: libc Filename: "directory"/"package_filename" Size: 2206292 MD5sum: "md5sum" SHA1: "sha key" SHA256: "sha256 key" Description: "description" I am running as sudo (and tried as root as well). I don't understand why apt-get won't see the package. Can you point out any flaws in what I have done, or perhaps some help on getting apt-get to properly see the package. Or perhaps an alternative. I am not even sure if this is a valid way to repackage something. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • What to do when:"The following packages have unmet dependencies"

    - by André Izquierdo
    When I try to install Wine, PlayonLinux, and some other programs, I get the following message: At the terminal: The following packages have unmet dependencies: wine : Depends: wine1.5 but it is not going to be installed E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages. At the software center: Package dependencies cannot be resolved This error could be caused by required additional software packages which are missing or not installable. Furthermore there could be a conflict between software packages which are not allowed to be installed at the same time. I already tried installing them with "aptitude" and failed. I am running Ubuntu 12.10 Please help! I've had this problem for a while now and don't know what to do!

    Read the article

  • File added to project doesn't get added to packages

    - by lorin
    I'm creating customized binary versions of OpenStack nova packages (lp:nova) using their packaging scripts (lp:~openstack-ubuntu-packagers/ubuntu/natty/nova/ubuntu). I create binaries by doing: dpkg-buildpackage -b -rfakeroot -tc -uc -D This creates a set of packages (python-nova, nova-common, nova-compute, ...). In our customized version of the code (lp:~usc-isi/nova/hpc-trunk), we recently merged in some changes from another branch, and there's now a new file in our repository that wasn't in upstream: nova/virt/cpuinfo.xml.template. This file isn't getting added to any of the packages, where it should be added to python-nova. Why wouldn't dpkg-buildpackage be including this file? A more basic question: how does dpkg-buildpackage determine which files go in which packages? Is it related at all to the debian/watch file? This contains some URLs that are pointing to the upstream project. version=3 http://launchpad.net/nova/+download http://launchpad.net/nova/.*/nova-(.*)\.tar\.gz http://nova.openstack.org/tarballs/ nova-(.*).tar.gz

    Read the article

  • Install packages with unmet dependencies

    - by Alvin Sim
    Hi all, I am trying to install some applications but some of them fail to install. The three applications I tried are Vim, Emacs and GNOME-Do. I am using Ubuntu 10.10 installed as a guest OS in VirtualBox. The kernel version installed is 2.6.35-26. The error I got is : alvinsim@ubuntu:/etc/apt$ sudo apt-get install emacs Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: emacs : Depends: emacs23 or emacs23-lucid but it is not going to be installed emacs23-nox but it is not going to be installed E: Broken packages What is wrong and how do I fix this? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How can i fix some broken packages PyQt packages?

    - by Jorge
    I'm trying to install PyQt but i've met some difficulties (i.e packages that won't be updated and stuff like that). I'm not very proficient with Ubuntu, so some help is needed. Here's the output i get from the terminal: sudo apt-get install python-qt4 Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: python-qt4 : Depends: libqt4-declarative (>= 4:4.7.0~rc1) but it is not going to be installed Depends: libqt4-designer (>= 4:4.7.0) but it is not going to be installed Depends: libqt4-help (>= 4:4.7.0) but it is not going to be installed Depends: libqt4-script (>= 4:4.7.0) but it is not going to be installed Depends: libqt4-scripttools (>= 4:4.7.0) but it is not going to be installed Depends: libqt4-svg (>= 4:4.7.0) but it is not going to be installed Depends: libqt4-test (>= 4:4.7.0) but it is not going to be installed Depends: libqt4-xmlpatterns (>= 4:4.7.0) but it is not going to be installed E: Broken packages

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >