Processing control commands:
> severity -1 wishlist
Bug #844300 [dpkg] aptitude can put the package system in a broken state with
different versions of a MultiArch package
Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'serious'
> retitle -1 dpkg: Please remove packages seclected for deinstall on Multi-Arch
>
Control: severity -1 wishlist
Control: retitle -1 dpkg: Please remove packages seclected for deinstall on
Multi-Arch version skew
[ I'm actually a bit undecided whether this is normal or wishlist in dpkg
itself, see below. ]
[ BTW David, do not forget to CC pkgname@packages.d.o either! :) ]
H
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 844300 dpkg 1.18.15
Bug #844300 [aptitude] aptitude can put the package system in a broken state
with different versions of a MultiArch package
Bug reassigned from package 'aptitude' to 'dpkg'.
Ignoring request to alter found versions of
reassign -1 dpkg 1.18.15
(cutting down heavily on the text)
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 02:43:35PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> --\ Packages to be upgraded (17)
[…]
> iuA nvidia-driver-libs367.57-1
> 367.57-2
[…]
> --\ Packages being removed because they a
On 2016-11-22 13:44:16 +0100, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Thanks for these additional details. I currently think that this might
> suffice to further track down the issue. So if the additional state
> bundle is too much effort, we'll see how far we come with this.
The bundle is very large (380 MB). I've
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 - moreinfo
Bug #844300 [aptitude] aptitude can put the package system in a broken state
with different versions of a MultiArch package
Removed tag(s) moreinfo.
--
844300: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=844300
Debian Bug Tracking System
Con
Control: tag -1 - moreinfo
Hi Vincent,
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2016-11-22 12:36:32 +0100, Axel Beckert wrote:
> > Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > In any case, if the dependencies are correct, the package system
> > > should never be put in a broken state.
> >
> > I'm sorry but that's wrong. Mai
On 2016-11-22 12:36:32 +0100, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > In any case, if the dependencies are correct, the package system
> > should never be put in a broken state.
>
> I'm sorry but that's wrong. Maintainer scripts can still put packages
> in a broken state even if dependenc
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 + moreinfo
Bug #844300 [aptitude] aptitude can put the package system in a broken state
with different versions of a MultiArch package
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
844300: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=844300
Debian Bug Tracking System
Conta
Control: tag -1 + moreinfo
Hi Vincent,
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2016-11-22 09:10:01 +, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 04:27 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > On 2016-11-22 00:37:14 +, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > > > In the end, you shouldn't have let aptitude remove the
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 844300 - moreinfo
Bug #844300 [aptitude] aptitude can put the package system in a broken state
with different versions of a MultiArch package
Removed tag(s) moreinfo.
> --
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Processing control commands:
> reassign -1 aptitude
Bug #844300 [nvidia-driver-libs] nvidia-driver-libs:amd64: upgrade failure due
to dependency issue
Bug reassigned from package 'nvidia-driver-libs' to 'aptitude'.
No longer marked as found in versions nvidia-graphics-drivers/367.57-2.
Ignoring r
On 2016-11-22 04:27:19 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Still, there are missing Breaks.
This may be a separate issue. For instance, if I try:
cventin:~> apt install -s libsolv0:i386/stable libsolv0:amd64
NOTE: This is only a simulation!
apt needs root privileges for real execution.
Ke
Control: -1 normal
On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 09:34 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Control: severity -1 serious
>
> due to inconsistent Recommends, which may be one of the causes of the
> issue.
I already explained that the -2 version only adds a patch to fix kernel
builds and there is no point hold
On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 04:27 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2016-11-22 00:37:14 +, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > In the end, you shouldn't have let aptitude remove the packages. It can
> > happen from time to time on unstable to have temporary inconsistent
> > state in the apt tree (that's why it
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 serious
Bug #844300 [nvidia-driver-libs] nvidia-driver-libs:amd64: upgrade failure due
to dependency issue
Severity set to 'serious' from 'normal'
--
844300: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=844300
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow.
Control: severity -1 normal
On Mon, 2016-11-14 at 16:20 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2016-11-14 15:52:28 +0100, Diederik de Haas wrote:
> > On maandag 14 november 2016 15:12:14 CET Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > aptitude often ignores Recommends. So, you should not rely on it.
> >
> > That's
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 normal
Bug #844300 [nvidia-driver-libs] nvidia-driver-libs:amd64: upgrade failure due
to dependency issue
Severity set to 'normal' from 'grave'
--
844300: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=844300
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@
On 2016-11-14 15:52:28 +0100, Diederik de Haas wrote:
> On maandag 14 november 2016 15:12:14 CET Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > aptitude often ignores Recommends. So, you should not rely on it.
>
> That's an incorrect statement.
> Aptitude, and I think apt too, doesn't automatically install _new_
> r
On maandag 14 november 2016 15:12:14 CET Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> aptitude often ignores Recommends. So, you should not rely on it.
That's an incorrect statement.
Aptitude, and I think apt too, doesn't automatically install _new_ recommended
packages for an already installed package.
It does rep
On 2016-11-14 14:01:55 +, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> If the i386 libraries are installed, then they must be upgraded at the
> same time. You cannot install them later. The dependencies are there to
> ensure this happens.
>
> This looks like a bug in aptitude, which shouldn't have let the upgrade
>
On Mon, 2016-11-14 at 14:40 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2016-11-14 12:09:50 +, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > The same versions are available in the i386 and amd64 archives. Are you
> > sure your local apt sources are all up to date?
>
> I could install the i386 versions later. But an upgrade
On 2016-11-14 12:09:50 +, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> The same versions are available in the i386 and amd64 archives. Are you
> sure your local apt sources are all up to date?
I could install the i386 versions later. But an upgrade should not
fail even when the apt sources are not up to date: that'
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
On Mon, 2016-11-14 at 11:31 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Package: nvidia-driver-libs
> Version: 367.57-2
> Severity: grave
> Justification: renders package unusable
>
> I got the folloing failure when upgrading with aptitude:
>
> Preconfiguring packages ...
> (Readin
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 moreinfo
Bug #844300 [nvidia-driver-libs] nvidia-driver-libs:amd64: upgrade failure due
to dependency issue
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
844300: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=844300
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org w
On 2016-11-14 11:31:38 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> dpkg: error processing package nvidia-driver-libs:amd64 (--configure):
> package nvidia-driver-libs:amd64 367.57-2 cannot be configured because
> nvidia-driver-libs:i386 is at a different version (367.57-1)
I wonder why such a failure since
Package: nvidia-driver-libs
Version: 367.57-2
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
I got the folloing failure when upgrading with aptitude:
Preconfiguring packages ...
(Reading database ... 528479 files and directories currently installed.)
Removing nvidia-driver-libs-i386:i386
27 matches
Mail list logo
