On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 11:15:37PM +0100, Esteban Manchado Vel?zquez wrote: > On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 05:39:36PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: > > > > [Please cc me; I'm very behind on -devel] > > > > > > I'm very confused by this bug and am sufficiently busy this week that > > I'm not going to be able to diagnose it right now. > > > > Could anyone who has a chance to do so please look at exactly what is > > failing from a dependency standpoint? > > I get the feeling I'm missing > > something about the interactions between pre-dependencies and > > dependencies and apt. > > I ran into the very same error some days ago. I have no idea about the > cause, but doing random tests, we (at work) found that upgrading to testing > and then to unstable "fixed" the problem. You only have to upgrade libpam or > libpam0g (I'm not sure which of them; the former doesn't exist in unstable, > IIRC), and then you can upgrade normally to unstable. That is, add testing to > your sources.list, do apt-get install libpam/testing, and then upgrade > normally. > > DEBCONF_DEBUG=developer showed nothing, BTW. > > HTH, > Hello,
In fact, i have also this bug. It comes from a circular versionned dependency betwee lipam0g and libpam-modules : libpam0g depend on libpam-modules > 0.7.X and libpam-modules depends on libpam0g > 0.7.X... So if you try to upgrade from a version below 0.7.X you cannot get it to work... Or you have to ignore the dependcy... Regard Sylvain LE GALL