Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

On 2015-09-13 23:57:13 +0200, Paul Wise wrote: > This config option improves the aptitude resolver for some situations: > > /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/99aptitude-resolver: > Aptitude::ProblemResolver { SolutionCost "removals"; } Unfortunately this has the consequence that aptitude sometimes wants to

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

On 2015-09-12 21:31, Виталий Филиппов wrote: If I request 'apt-get install libreoffice' it says: E: Error, pkgProblemResolver::Resolve generated breaks, this may be caused by held packages. I've had a similar problem with breaking resolves. In my case it seemed to be caused by multiarch

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

Hi, you can try apt-get update, apt-get dist-upgrade. It will remove some packages. After this update, reinstall the needed packages again. Besides: at the moment the repo is indeed in a very "strange" state. Good luck! Hans

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

Hi! I've applied all latest updates with 'apt-get upgrade --with-new-pkgs', now I have the following list of non-upgradable stuff: akonadi-backend-mysql akonadi-server apt apt-utils aptitude aptitude-common audacious-plugins blender breeze breeze-cursor-theme breeze-icon-theme

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

Jakub Wilk writes: > * peter green , 2015-09-19, 06:29: >> Another big one is the descision was taken NOT to change the sonames >> when making sub-transitions. I presume this was done to avoid >> deviating from upstream sonmaes > > I don't think this is the

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

* peter green , 2015-09-19, 06:29: The unusual problems with the g++-5 transition are: Another big one is the descision was taken NOT to change the sonames when making sub-transitions. I presume this was done to avoid deviating from upstream sonmaes I don't think this

Re: Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

The unusual problems with the g++-5 transition are: Another big one is the descision was taken NOT to change the sonames when making sub-transitions. I presume this was done to avoid deviating from upstream sonmaes but the flip side has been that major sub-transitions have become "all or

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

On 13/09/15 10:34, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Svante Signell, le Sun 13 Sep 2015 11:33:31 +0200, a écrit : >>> That's what Sid/Unstable is used for. You'll have to live with that :) >>> This transition was IMHO a monster compared to the usual transitions >>> and it might happen again. Se at the end

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

Le 12/09/2015 22:37, Thomas Goirand a écrit : > On 09/12/2015 08:55 PM, Виталий Филиппов wrote: >> Can you please tell when everything will be fixed i.e. when all packages >> will be rebuilt with newer gcc? And can you please NOT upload such >> "breaking updates" in the future before testing

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

Виталий Филиппов yourcmc.ru> writes: > > Try using aptitude instead of apt. It sometimes does a better job, and > I've tried and it offered me 100500 different insane ways of solving the > situation... :) that's why I don't use it, its solver seems really insane. > apt-get is far more

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 11:17:32PM +0300, Виталий Филиппов wrote: > The single thing that I found aptitude useful for is finding and removing > packages that are unavailable in current debian release anymore :) Try apt-show-versions -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

* Andrey Rahmatullin , 2015-09-14, 20:42: The single thing that I found aptitude useful for is finding and removing packages that are unavailable in current debian release anymore :) Try apt-show-versions Try "apt list". -- Jakub Wilk

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

On Sun, 2015-09-13 at 11:21 +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote: > Am Samstag, den 12.09.2015, 21:55 +0300 schrieb Виталий Филиппов: > > That's what Sid/Unstable is used for. You'll have to live with that :) > This transition was IMHO a monster compared to the usual transitions > and it might happen

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

Svante Signell, le Sun 13 Sep 2015 11:33:31 +0200, a écrit : > > That's what Sid/Unstable is used for. You'll have to live with that :) > > This transition was IMHO a monster compared to the usual transitions > > and it might happen again. Se at the end we probably should discuss, > > what to

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

Am Samstag, den 12.09.2015, 21:55 +0300 schrieb Виталий Филиппов: > Hi everyone! > > Is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5 transition? Or by something > else? Why apt-get dist-upgrade still wants to remove a lot of packages? It > lasts for several weeks, I can't u

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

On 12.09.2015 21:23, Russ Allbery wrote: Виталий Филиппов <vita...@yourcmc.ru> writes: Is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5 transition? Or by something else? Why apt-get dist-upgrade still wants to remove a lot of packages? It lasts for several weeks, I can't upgrade normally...

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

On Sb, 12 sep 15, 23:27:48, Виталий Филиппов wrote: > > Maybe adding jessie into sources.list will help to calm resolver... I'd rather suggest stretch. https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/03/msg00582.html "Personally I couldn’t care less about installability problems on user’s machines

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

Andrei POPESCU writes: > On Sb, 12 sep 15, 23:27:48, Виталий Филиппов wrote: >> >> Maybe adding jessie into sources.list will help to calm resolver... > > I'd rather suggest stretch. While helpfull with normal transitions this is basically pointless with the GCC5 one

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

Andreas Tscharner writes: > On 12.09.2015 21:23, Russ Allbery wrote: >> I've been able to upgrade normally during the entire gcc-5 transition. > Lucky you! > aptitude wanted to remove 45 packages yesterday. I spent about 5 hours to > manually resolve dependencies by

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 7:05 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: > I stopped using aptitude for routine upgrades a while back. My experience > with aptitude is that the first solution is almost always wrong, and the > second solution is sometimes better than the first solution that apt comes > up with.

is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

Hi everyone! Is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5 transition? Or by something else? Why apt-get dist-upgrade still wants to remove a lot of packages? It lasts for several weeks, I can't upgrade normally... Can you please tell when everything will be fixed i.e. when all packages

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

2015-09-12 21:43 GMT+02:00 Russ Allbery : > Виталий Филиппов writes: > >> apt-get dist-upgrade tries to remove the following packages: For sure, blender has not transitioned yet. > There's tons of noise in there that actually should be removed, like most >

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

2015-09-12 21:50 GMT+02:00 Mathieu Parent (Debian) : > 2015-09-12 21:43 GMT+02:00 Russ Allbery : >> Виталий Филиппов writes: >> >>> apt-get dist-upgrade tries to remove the following packages: > > For sure, blender has not transitioned yet.

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

apt-get dist-upgrade tries to remove the following packages: blender coinor-libcbc3 coinor-libcoinmp1 coinor-libcoinutils3 coinor-libosi1 evince gnome-icon-theme gnome-icon-theme-symbolic kde-window-manager kio-extras konsole kwin-addons kwin-common kwin-x11 libalien-wxwidgets-perl

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

apt-get dist-upgrade tries to remove the following packages: There's tons of noise in there that actually should be removed, like most of the libraries (which have newer, conflicting versions), but also some stuff that really shouldn't be removed. What does apt-get upgrade do for you right

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

❦ 12 septembre 2015 21:55 +0300, Виталий Филиппов  : > Can you please tell when everything will be fixed i.e. when all packages > will be rebuilt with newer gcc? And can you please NOT upload such > "breaking updates" in the future before testing everything that's broken > in

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

Виталий Филиппов writes: > apt-get dist-upgrade tries to remove the following packages: There's tons of noise in there that actually should be removed, like most of the libraries (which have newer, conflicting versions), but also some stuff that really shouldn't be removed.

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

+++ Виталий Филиппов [2015-09-12 22:31 +0300]: > apt-get dist-upgrade tries to remove the following packages: and upgrade rather than dist-upgrade? Try using aptitude instead of apt. It sometimes does a better job, and just 'aptitude' so you get the curses interface makes it _much_ easier to

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

On Sat, 2015-09-12 at 22:31 +0300, Виталий Филиппов wrote: > My sources.list contains sid, experimental and jessie-updates (+ oibaf > graphics-drivers ppa) That doesn't make a lot of sense. jessie-updates sits on top of (predictably enough) Jessie and won't contain anything relevant for

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

That doesn't make a lot of sense. jessie-updates sits on top of (predictably enough) Jessie and won't contain anything relevant for unstable that isn't already in unstable anyway. Of course, it seems it's just left in there after some upgrades... But it does not make any change either :) just

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 23:27:48 +0300, ??? wrote: >Actually now I only wanted to install 'sni-qt' package... and I wanted to >wait for the full upgrade until everything is fixed. But apt-get install >sni-qt also fails and that's why I'm writing here :) sni-qt is

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

On 09/12/2015 08:55 PM, Виталий Филиппов wrote: > Can you please tell when everything will be fixed i.e. when all packages > will be rebuilt with newer gcc? And can you please NOT upload such > "breaking updates" in the future before testing everything that's broken > in experimental?.. Because

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

apt-get dist-upgrade tries to remove the following packages: and upgrade rather than dist-upgrade? Try using aptitude instead of apt. It sometimes does a better job, and just 'aptitude' so you get the curses interface makes it _much_ easier to track down what's actually up. 'B' shows broken

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

Quoting Виталий Филиппов (2015-09-12 22:17:32) >>> apt-get dist-upgrade tries to remove the following packages: >> >> and upgrade rather than dist-upgrade? >> >> Try using aptitude instead of apt. It sometimes does a better job, >> and just 'aptitude' so you get the curses interface makes it

Re: is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5?

Виталий Филиппов <vita...@yourcmc.ru> writes: > Is the whole unstable still broken by gcc-5 transition? Or by something > else? Why apt-get dist-upgrade still wants to remove a lot of packages? > It lasts for several weeks, I can't upgrade normally... I've been able to upgrade