Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2005-11-03 12:51:51 +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>> AFAIK, the distribution tags are deprecated and rather meaningless,
>> now that we have a version-aware BTS.
>
> In fact, the problem I had was on a machine with Debian/unstable,
> and I tried to rein
On 2005-11-03 12:51:51 +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> AFAIK, the distribution tags are deprecated and rather meaningless,
> now that we have a version-aware BTS.
In fact, the problem I had was on a machine with Debian/unstable,
and I tried to reinstall a package from testing (because the new
unstabl
Hilmar Preusse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Since tetex-bin in unstable doesn't have the file, the bug exists only
>> in testing, and can only be solved when tetex-bin_3.0 gets into testing.
>>
> So, why not tag that bug sarge and leave it as it is? It will be
> solved as soon as teTeX 3.0 hits
On 19.10.05 Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
> > I can't install tetex-bin 2.0.2-31 (from testing) due to the following
> > error:
> >
> > Unpacking tetex-bin (from .../tetex-bin_2.0.2-31_i386.deb) ...
> > dpkg: error processing /var/cache/a
On 2005-10-20 12:06:42 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> In the mail where you reported this, the error message is:
>
> Error: `tex -ini -jobname=xmltex -progname=xmltex &latex xmltex.ini' failed
>
> However, when I install xmltex on a system with tetex-2.0.2 (e.g. on
> sarge), the message is
>
> ru
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> merge 328749 334736
Bug#328749: package installation fails with teTeX 3.0
Bug#334736: xmltex: Fails to install in unstable (and probably testing)
Merged 328749 334736.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debia
merge 328749 334736
thanks
Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2005-10-20 10:15:54 +0200, Ralf Stubner wrote:
>> Sorry, but I am not sure what you are trying to tell here. Since 3.0 is
>> in unstable, we can't easily provide a fixed 2.0.2 package for testing,
>
> Hmm... yes. (I've not
On 2005-10-20 10:15:54 +0200, Ralf Stubner wrote:
> Sorry, but I am not sure what you are trying to tell here. Since 3.0 is
> in unstable, we can't easily provide a fixed 2.0.2 package for testing,
Hmm... yes. (I've not checked, but if stable (sarge) has the same
problem when installing the packag
Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2005-10-19 22:17:38 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Vincent's statements whether he is using etch or sid were a little
>> confusing, but since tetex-bin_2.0.2-31 is now only in etch, it
>> might be that he is using this;
>
> On this machine, I track un
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 16:36 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2005-10-19 15:49:07 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> > No, it isn't, since 334613 is against 3.0-9, and has only been
> > introduced by this upload. I don't know what is happening with 2.0.2,
> > and honestly I won't try to find out, sin
On 2005-10-19 22:17:38 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Vincent's statements whether he is using etch or sid were a little
> confusing, but since tetex-bin_2.0.2-31 is now only in etch, it
> might be that he is using this;
On this machine, I track unstable. But I may want to downgrade packages
to earl
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 10:17:38PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 07:50:16PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> >> Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > How do we continue, Frank? I guess best is to do nothing and wait unt
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 07:50:16PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > How do we continue, Frank? I guess best is to do nothing and wait until
>> > tetex3 hits testing, and everything is fixed. Or?
>
>> Yes, I
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 07:50:16PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > How do we continue, Frank? I guess best is to do nothing and wait until
> > tetex3 hits testing, and everything is fixed. Or?
> Yes, I think so. I fear the bug behind this is that one
Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How do we continue, Frank? I guess best is to do nothing and wait until
> tetex3 hits testing, and everything is fixed. Or?
Yes, I think so. I fear the bug behind this is that one should not
declare "Replaces" on a packages that may not be installed
On 2005-10-19 15:49:07 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> No, it isn't, since 334613 is against 3.0-9, and has only been
> introduced by this upload. I don't know what is happening with 2.0.2,
> and honestly I won't try to find out, since this version is no longer
> available in sid. If you like, you c
Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Setting up tetex-extra (2.0.2c-9) ...
[...]
> Isn't this bug 334613?
No, it isn't, since 334613 is against 3.0-9, and has only been
introduced by this upload. I don't know what is happening with 2.0.2,
and honestly I won't try to find out, since this
On 2005-10-19 15:20:29 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2005-10-19 15:10:07 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> > As of yesterday evening, 2.0.2-31 is only available in testing, and only
> > there bug #334701 exists; for testing the "quick fix" will work.
>
> It doesn't.
And with "apt-get -f install":
On 2005-10-19 15:10:07 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> As of yesterday evening, 2.0.2-31 is only available in testing, and only
> there bug #334701 exists; for testing the "quick fix" will work.
It doesn't.
dixsept:/home/vlefevre# apt-get install tetex-extra/testing tetex-bin/testing
tetex-base/tes
Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2005-10-19 14:16:34 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > On 2005-10-19 13:18:15 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>> >> As a quick fix for you, you can uninstall texinfo, then install
>> >> tetex-bin, and install
On 2005-10-19 14:16:34 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On 2005-10-19 13:18:15 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> >> As a quick fix for you, you can uninstall texinfo, then install
> >> tetex-bin, and install texinfo again afterwards.
> >
> > I've just tried,
Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2005-10-19 13:18:15 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>> As a quick fix for you, you can uninstall texinfo, then install
>> tetex-bin, and install texinfo again afterwards.
>
> I've just tried, but I get the same error as for the unstable version
> (bug 334
On Mit, 19 Okt 2005, Frank Küster wrote:
> > I can't install tetex-bin 2.0.2-31 (from testing) due to the following
> > error:
> >
> > Unpacking tetex-bin (from .../tetex-bin_2.0.2-31_i386.deb) ...
> > dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/tetex-bin_2.0.2-31_i386.deb
> > (--unpack):
> >
On 2005-10-19 13:18:15 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> As a quick fix for you, you can uninstall texinfo, then install
> tetex-bin, and install texinfo again afterwards.
I've just tried, but I get the same error as for the unstable version
(bug 334613). So I think that a downgrade to testing won't so
Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Package: tetex-bin
> Version: 2.0.2-31
> Severity: grave
> Justification: renders package unusable
>
> I can't install tetex-bin 2.0.2-31 (from testing) due to the following
> error:
>
> Unpacking tetex-bin (from .../tetex-bin_2.0.2-31_i386.deb) ...
> d
Package: tetex-bin
Version: 2.0.2-31
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
I can't install tetex-bin 2.0.2-31 (from testing) due to the following
error:
Unpacking tetex-bin (from .../tetex-bin_2.0.2-31_i386.deb) ...
dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/tetex-bin_2.0.2-
26 matches
Mail list logo
