Re: apt wants to remove bash, base-files; other move questions
David Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Now using deb http://amd64.debian.net/debian/ sid main contrib An upgrade wants to remove base-files and bash. Digging deeper, I see base-files is being removed because: base-files pre-depends on libc6 ( 2.3.2.dsl-20.0.1) I saw some traffic on the list that looked similar. But I don't understand what you did, and I don't want to guess wrong and hose my whole system. Do I want base-files 3.1.2-0.0.0.3.pure64? Or just 3.1.2? Do I want libc6 2.3.2.ds1-20.0.0.1.pure64? or 2.3.2.ds1-21? What is the safest way to handle this transition? -David And yet another person that hasn't been reading the ML for the last half year. Go fish. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: apt wants to remove bash, base-files; other move questions
On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 23:21 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: And yet another person that hasn't been reading the ML for the last half year. Go fish. I know I'm ignorant and I screwed up, that much is obvious. But can I at least tell you what this looked like from my perspective? Is there any info on this move, this problem, anywhere other than this mailing list? I wasn't able to find it. Your HOWTO isn't up to date. Your debian.org port page had some current info but nothing about this problem. Mailing lists are a disorganized, unreliable way to convey information. I've been on the list for a while, but I'm not an expert like you and I don't always understand everything or its relevance. I also re-read the archives before I asked my question, and I said so (I saw some traffic on the list that looked similar). Searching on libc gives a lot of hits that don't all immediately seem clear. http://lists.debian.org/debian-amd64/2005/05/msg00151.html This seems similar, but not quite the same problem. This looks closer: http://lists.debian.org/debian-amd64/2005/04/msg00238.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-amd64/2005/04/msg00242.html OK, I'm guessing you guys tweaked the version numbering during the move? So I think I need to force myself to a different version of base-files and libc. Hey, I wonder what will happen if I'm wrong and I mess this up? Why don't I ask, just to be sure. And for this, I get the response above. You probably think I don't know what it's like to be in your shoes and do a lot of work for nothing and have to answer stupid questions all the time. You're wrong. I know what it's like. But do you know what it feels like to try to use pure64 right now? Regards, -David -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: apt wants to remove bash, base-files; other move questions
David Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Now using deb http://amd64.debian.net/debian/ sid main contrib An upgrade wants to remove base-files and bash. Digging deeper, I see base-files is being removed because: base-files pre-depends on libc6 ( 2.3.2.dsl-20.0.1) I saw some traffic on the list that looked similar. But I don't understand what you did, and I don't want to guess wrong and hose my whole system. Do I want base-files 3.1.2-0.0.0.3.pure64? Or just 3.1.2? Update base-files to 3.1.2-0.0.1, or downgrade it to 3.1.2. Except for the version number, they are identical; 3.1.2 has just been rebuilt as 3.1.2-0.0.1 to have a newer version number than 3.1.2-0.0.0.3.pure64. Do I want libc6 2.3.2.ds1-20.0.0.1.pure64? or 2.3.2.ds1-21? What is the safest way to handle this transition? After you have installed the appropriate base-files version, just perform an upgrade as usual. This should (possibly among other things) update libc6 to 2.3.2.ds1-21. Martin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: apt wants to remove bash, base-files; other move questions
El lun, 09-05-2005 a las 18:51 -0400, David Wood escribi: On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 23:21 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: And yet another person that hasn't been reading the ML for the last half year. Go fish. I know I'm ignorant and I screwed up, that much is obvious. But can I at least tell you what this looked like from my perspective? David, the problem is that this question was answered five to ten times in the last two weeks only; in fact, Goswin was the most patient of all and always gave an answer in-line instead of sending the poster to read the list. They all had the same problem as you, and they all received a similar answer. It won't break if you follow the instructions in the previous threads. Or at least nobody complained so far if it broke for them. Greetings, -- Javier Kohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: blashyrkh #2361802 Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: apt wants to remove bash, base-files; other move questions
On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 08:06:17PM -0300, Javier Kohen wrote: David, the problem is that this question was answered five to ten times in the last two weeks only; in fact, Goswin was the most patient of all and always gave an answer in-line instead of sending the poster to read the list. Definitely time for a FAQ or wiki update, then. ;-) You might cut these questions off before they're even asked. -- Chad Walstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wookimus.net/ assert(expired(knowledge)); /* core dump */ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: apt wants to remove bash, base-files; other move questions
David Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: OK, I'm guessing you guys tweaked the version numbering during the move? So I think I need to force myself to a different version of base-files and libc. We tweaked it about 4 month ago to get an unpached libc6 and base-files into sid amd64 and sarge amd64. Has nothing to do with the move. Hey, I wonder what will happen if I'm wrong and I mess this up? hehe, sorry to do this to you, but thats also in the ML. You end up without ld where it should be and no dynamic binary starts anymore. Keep a boot cd ready if you are unsure. Why don't I ask, just to be sure. And for this, I get the response above. You probably think I don't know what it's like to be in your shoes and do a lot of work for nothing and have to answer stupid questions all the time. You're wrong. I know what it's like. But do you know what it feels like to try to use pure64 right now? Regards, -David I just told you where to look. Nothing against you. The ML archive is full about this so everyone should be able to find it. The last big thread was when the new libc6 got uploaded. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: apt wants to remove bash, base-files; other move questions
On Tue, 2005-05-10 at 01:18 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: I just told you where to look. Nothing against you. The ML archive is full about this so everyone should be able to find it. The last big thread was when the new libc6 got uploaded. Nothing against you either! I just wanted to try and explain that it's more difficult to deal with things that are only documented on a mailing list than people seem to realize. I wish there were a way I could help keep the project documentation more up to date. I could go update it with this information myself right now. I don't know how many pure64 users there are, but maybe even I won't be the last person to ask this? Regards, -David -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
