Re: apt-get: broken dependencies
Florian Kulzer schrieb: On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 17:45:18 +0200, Hans Vogelsberger wrote: E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) dpkg --force-overwrite -i /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-i386_2.6-2_amd64.deb followed by apt-get install -f should fix this. This did it, thank you very much. Upgrading is possible again. Something about the meaning of the words testing and Ubuntu comes to mind, but I think it is better if I let it slide. The word 'testing' was chosen by Debian maintainers to show what they think Testing was and is good for them. I should prefer a name like 'desktop' to show what I think Testing was and is good for me. Servers need stable, but for desktops you better use Testing or, if you dare, Sid. The meaning of the word testing makes maintainers forget how important this distri is for desktop users, therefore in Sarge there was and in Etch there is beginning right now a period when important programs are brought from Sid to Testing immature and much too early. I did not follow the discussion concerning the word 'Ubuntu' and mentioned this distribution only in the faint hope to avoid the work and the upset connected with the use of Testing, but I am afraid that in spite of my 76 years I am still too curious to change. You can run LANG=C somecommand and you will get the messages of somecommand in English. This is really important. Thank you very much. Hans. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: apt-get: broken dependencies
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 07:05:50PM +0200, Hans Vogelsberger wrote: The word 'testing' was chosen by Debian maintainers to show what they think Testing was and is good for them. I should prefer a name like 'desktop' to show what I think Testing was and is good for me. Servers need stable, but for desktops you better use Testing or, if you dare, Sid. The meaning of the word testing makes maintainers forget how important this distri is for desktop users, therefore in Sarge there was and in Etch there is beginning right now a period when important programs are brought from Sid to Testing immature and much too early. And many would disagree here and complain why it takes so long for the packages to migrate from unstable :) Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: apt-get: broken dependencies
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 19:05:50 +0200, Hans Vogelsberger wrote: [...] The word 'testing' was chosen by Debian maintainers to show what they think Testing was and is good for them. I should prefer a name like 'desktop' to show what I think Testing was and is good for me. Servers need stable, but for desktops you better use Testing or, if you dare, Sid. The meaning of the word testing makes maintainers forget how important this distri is for desktop users, therefore in Sarge there was and in Etch there is beginning right now a period when important programs are brought from Sid to Testing immature and much too early. I know that in fact testing is a very usable desktop platform for many people, but you have to keep in mind that it is really only meant to be for testing the next release of Debian before it becomes stable. It would of course be nice if there was a separate Debian desktop branch available, but this does not really fit into Debian's workflow of getting the next stable release into shape and the project simply does not have the manpower to support an additional branch. You might want to check out the packages apt-listbugs and apt-listchanges if you are not using them already. They can help you avoid bugs and other unpleasant surprises related to upgrades. The chances are quite high that apt-listbugs would have warned you about the problem with the package that blocked your system, and you could have avoided the whole problem simply by delaying the upgrade of that one package until the fixed version became available. (Apt-listbugs checks the Debian bug tracking system for critical bugs whenever new packages are about to be installed and you can simply put problematic packages on hold before carrying on with the rest of the upgrade.) -- Regards,| http://users.icfo.es/Florian.Kulzer Florian | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
apt-get: broken dependencies
Since one week or so apt-get is broken because of unmet dependencies on my → AMD64, Aspire 4200, Debian, mirror http://ftp.at.debian.org/debian/ → testing. There should be a bug report, but I do not know against which of the five packages apt-get, gcc-4.2-base, lib32stdc++6, glibc-2.6.1, or dpkg. Some further packages also seem to depend on the same 'old' version of gcc-4.2-base. Experience shows that bug reporting against the wrong package leads to no consequences at all. This would be more than disastrous. Testing without upgrades is absolutely unusable. I would have to change to Ubuntu after having used Debian testing since it came up - in the times of Potato, wasn't it? The following error messages I had to translate from German, only a few of them matched with readable texts I found in /bin/apt-get, so please excuse if there are mistakes. Errors after apt-get upgrade, apt-get dist-upgrade and apt-get deselect-upgrade (exactly the same text): Package lists are read... done Dependency tree is built... done You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these: The following packages have unmet dependencies: lib32stdc++6: depends: gcc-4.2-base (= 4.2-20070712-1) but 4.2-20070627-1 is installed locales: depends: glibc-2.6-1 E: Unmet dependencies. Try to use -f. Errors after apt-get -f install: (Reading data base ... 88142 files and dictionaries are installed.) Package lists are read. Preparing to replace libc6-i386 2.5-9 (by .../libc6-i386_2.6-2_amd64.deb) ... Unpacking replacement for libc6-i386 ... dpkg: Error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-i386_2.6-2_amd64.deb (--unpack): Trying to overwrite »/usr/lib32« which is also in lib32z1 Errors occurred while processing: /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-i386_2.6-2_amd64.deb E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) When trying to remove one or all of the above files, apt-get threatens to delete several screenfuls of files, including some which I need and use every day. This is, what aptitude does, therefore I never used this program. '--reinstall install' shows no effect at all. After updating to kernel 2.6.21 some more insufficiencies showed up, especially during boot procedures. I shall ask for them separately when they become bothering too much. Hans
Re: apt-get: broken dependencies
On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 17:45:18 +0200, Hans Vogelsberger wrote: Since one week or so apt-get is broken because of unmet dependencies on my → AMD64, Aspire 4200, Debian, mirror http://ftp.at.debian.org/debian/ → testing. There should be a bug report, but I do not know against which of the five packages apt-get, gcc-4.2-base, lib32stdc++6, glibc-2.6.1, or dpkg. Some further packages also seem to depend on the same 'old' version of gcc-4.2-base. The dependencies look OK to me: Your output below shows that the new version of lib32stdc++6 requires gcc-4.2-base version 4.2-20070712-1, which is the version currently in Lenny. The root of your problem seems to be a known bug of lib32z1 (fixed in the meantime) which blocks the installation of libc6-i386 (and everything else). Experience shows that bug reporting against the wrong package leads to no consequences at all. This would be more than disastrous. Testing without upgrades is absolutely unusable. I would have to change to Ubuntu after having used Debian testing since it came up - in the times of Potato, wasn't it? Something about the meaning of the words testing and Ubuntu comes to mind, but I think it is better if I let it slide. The following error messages I had to translate from German, only a few of them matched with readable texts I found in /bin/apt-get, so please excuse if there are mistakes. You can run LANG=C somecommand and you will get the messages of somecommand in English. Errors after apt-get upgrade, apt-get dist-upgrade and apt-get deselect-upgrade (exactly the same text): Package lists are read... done Dependency tree is built... done You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these: The following packages have unmet dependencies: lib32stdc++6: depends: gcc-4.2-base (= 4.2-20070712-1) but 4.2-20070627-1 is installed locales: depends: glibc-2.6-1 E: Unmet dependencies. Try to use -f. Most likely this is only a consequence of the lib32z1 problem and will go away as soon as the latter is fixed. Errors after apt-get -f install: (Reading data base ... 88142 files and dictionaries are installed.) Package lists are read. Preparing to replace libc6-i386 2.5-9 (by .../libc6-i386_2.6-2_amd64.deb) ... Unpacking replacement for libc6-i386 ... dpkg: Error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-i386_2.6-2_amd64.deb (--unpack): Trying to overwrite »/usr/lib32« which is also in lib32z1 Errors occurred while processing: /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-i386_2.6-2_amd64.deb E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) dpkg --force-overwrite -i /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-i386_2.6-2_amd64.deb followed by apt-get install -f should fix this. When trying to remove one or all of the above files, apt-get threatens to delete several screenfuls of files, including some which I need and use every day. That is to be expected if you try to remove important system libraries and related packages. This is, what aptitude does, therefore I never used this program. No, this is not what aptitude does, unless it is used by someone who does not understand the Debian packaging system and who has not bothered to read aptitude's excellent documentation (available in four languages). '--reinstall install' shows no effect at all. After updating to kernel 2.6.21 some more insufficiencies showed up, especially during boot procedures. I shall ask for them separately when they become bothering too much. -- Regards,| http://users.icfo.es/Florian.Kulzer Florian |
Apt-get broken dependencies
After trying some of the suggestions in : http://distrocenter.linux.com/article.pl?sid=05/10/12/1952217tid=106 I'm still stuck with apt-get refusing to remove gforge-db-postgresql and gforge-ldap-openldap because they depend on postgresql which was removed first. dpkg (remove and purge) also fail. ( dpkg sub process returns error code (1) ) even apt-get -f remove doesn't fix the problem because it attempts to INSTALL postgresql (to solve the dependencies), and installing postgresql fails because /etc/init.d/postgresql is missing. Now apt-get refuses to upgrade ANY software because of the broken dependencies wth gforge-db-postgresql and gforge-ldap-openldap. Why is it impossible to REMOVE packages which depend on packages that are not present? Why is it impossible to force removal (purge) packages which depend on packages that ARE NOT INSTALLED? I can understand a warning when requesting removal of a package on which OTHER packages do depend, when those packages ARE installed, but this is the opposite case. This would be something I would just ignore, except NOW apt-get will not install ANY new software because of the broken dependencies. At the end of the article cite above, it mentioned re-installing everything, as a last resort. If I go that route it will be with another distro, since Debian seems a little tired. Bottom line: Postgresql (default) with Debian has caused problems since day one, as have gforge, and now I have a dependency mess. _ On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Apt-get broken dependencies
Wednesday, 15 February 2006 05:06, Thomas Lenon wrote: I'm still stuck with apt-get refusing to remove gforge-db-postgresql and gforge-ldap-openldap because they depend on postgresql which was removed first. That really should not be an issue. Have you tried to list them for removal all at the same time to make it clear that you would like to remove all of them, i.e. apt-get remove gforge-db-postgresql gforge-ldap-openldap postgresql even apt-get -f remove doesn't fix the problem because it attempts to INSTALL postgresql (to solve the dependencies), and installing postgresql fails because /etc/init.d/postgresql is missing. That's certainly an interesting behaviour. Since you wouldn't be particularly concerned about the integrity of postgresql should you be able to install it (because you'd most likely just remove it right away), you might want to try touch /etc/init.d/postgresql and then retry. At the end of the article cite above, it mentioned re-installing everything, as a last resort. If I go that route it will be with another distro, since Debian seems a little tired. You really should not have to reinstall a Debian system, unless you've got yourself in a mess by mixing distributions or included other nonstandard repositories. Things do occasionally get interesting if you run Sid, but I've never run into anything that couldn't be fixed. In my experience, aptitute is a much better tool than apt-get, particularly when there are conflicting dependencies or peculiarities. The resolver will usually offer several different solutions to a problem, and it seems a bit more willing to override the protests of dpkg when it knows it's right (e.g. dpkg protests on installation of a package because an installed package conflicts with it, but aptitude knows the conflicting package is about to be removed). It does tend to work better if you've used it all along, so that it knows which packages have been manually installed. But it might be worth a try in your case. Just ignore the incomprehensible GUI mode and use it as a command-line drop-in replacement for apt-get. If you find that this advice is all a bit general, it might help if you include information on what versions of the packages you have installed (and the versions apt-get is trying to install), which Debian distribution you are running, and which repositories you use. -- Alex Nordstrom http://lx.n3.net/ Please do not CC me in followups; I am subscribed to debian-user. pgpN1GLZ91tJO.pgp Description: PGP signature
