Hola, em dic Jaume i tinc un problema. Després d'instal·lar Debian
Jessie (LTS) he fet un...
# aptitude update
Estat actual: 46 actualitzacions [+46].
# aptitude upgrade
processant els activadors per a fontconfig (2.11.0-6.3)…
S'estan processant els activadors per a libglib2.0-0
El Tue, 15 Jul 2014 13:19:31 -0700, Aristobulo Pinzon escribió:
El Mon, 14 Jul 2014 12:08:06 -0700, Aristobulo Pinzon escribió:
Saludo Señores de la lista.
Haciendo la actualización con aptitude upgrade me sale:
Preconfigurando paquetes ...
dpkg: aviso: `ldconfig' no se ha encontrado en
2014-07-14 21:08 GMT+02:00 Aristobulo Pinzon aristobulopin...@yahoo.com:
Saludo Señores de la lista.
Haciendo la actualización con aptitude upgrade
me sale:
Preconfigurando paquetes ...
dpkg: aviso: `ldconfig' no se ha encontrado en el PATH o no es ejecutable
dpkg: aviso: `start-stop
El día 15 de julio de 2014, 10:25, fernando sainz
fernandojose.sa...@gmail.com escribió:
2014-07-14 21:08 GMT+02:00 Aristobulo Pinzon aristobulopin...@yahoo.com:
Saludo Señores de la lista.
Haciendo la actualización con aptitude upgrade
me sale:
Preconfigurando paquetes ...
dpkg: aviso
El lunes, 14 jul 2014 a las 21:08 horas (UTC+2),
Aristobulo Pinzon escribió:
Saludo Señores de la lista.
Haciendo la actualización con aptitude upgrade
me sale:
Preconfigurando paquetes ...
dpkg: aviso: `ldconfig' no se ha encontrado en el PATH o no es ejecutable
dpkg: aviso: `start-stop-daemon
El Mon, 14 Jul 2014 12:08:06 -0700, Aristobulo Pinzon escribió:
Saludo Señores de la lista.
Haciendo la actualización con aptitude upgrade me sale:
Preconfigurando paquetes ...
dpkg: aviso: `ldconfig' no se ha encontrado en el PATH o no es
ejecutable
(...)
Si preguntas a Google (en
El Mon, 14 Jul 2014 12:08:06 -0700, Aristobulo Pinzon escribió:
Saludo Señores de la lista.
Haciendo la actualización con aptitude upgrade me sale:
Preconfigurando paquetes ...
dpkg: aviso: `ldconfig' no se ha encontrado en el PATH o no es
ejecutable
(...)
Si preguntas a Google (en
El Tue, 15 Jul 2014 10:25:22 +0200
fernando sainz fernandojose.sa...@gmail.com escribió:
2014-07-14 21:08 GMT+02:00 Aristobulo Pinzon aristobulopin...@yahoo.com:
Saludo Señores de la lista.
Haciendo la actualización con aptitude upgrade
me sale:
Preconfigurando paquetes ...
dpkg
Saludo Señores de la lista.
Haciendo la actualización con aptitude upgrade
me sale:
Preconfigurando paquetes ...
dpkg: aviso: `ldconfig' no se ha encontrado en el PATH o no es ejecutable
dpkg: aviso: `start-stop-daemon' no se ha encontrado en el PATH o no es
ejecutable
dpkg: error: no se ha
Hi,
I have a rather acute problem with aptitude. I am tracking wheezy and
very often, the resolver wants to remove half my system rather than
upgrade a couple of packages. These packages are not held back (aptitude
calls them kept back), even though they may be manually installed. Is
there a way
Panayiotis Karabassis:
I have a rather acute problem with aptitude. I am tracking wheezy and
very often, the resolver wants to remove half my system rather than
upgrade a couple of packages.
Just run 'apt-get dist-upgrade' in these cases. It offers better
solutions in many cases. You can
On Lu, 16 iul 12, 20:32:07, Panayiotis Karabassis wrote:
Hi,
I have a rather acute problem with aptitude. I am tracking wheezy and
very often, the resolver wants to remove half my system rather than
upgrade a couple of packages. These packages are not held back (aptitude
calls them kept
root@test:~# aptitude upgrade
The following packages will be upgraded:
acpid at base-files bind9-host dnsutils host libapache2-mod-php5 libapr1
libbind9-60 libbrlapi0.5 libdns69 libisc62 libisccc60 libisccfg62
liblwres60 libmozjs2d libmysqlclient16 libpolkit-agent-1-0
libpolkit-backend-1-0
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 05:43:48PM +0530, Joby Mathew wrote:
root@test:~# aptitude upgrade�
The following packages will be upgraded:�
[cut]
53 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/43.5 MB of archives. After unpacking 637 kB
On 28.06.2012 15:13, Joby Mathew wrote:
root@test:~# aptitude upgrade
The following packages will be upgraded:
acpid at base-files bind9-host dnsutils host libapache2-mod-php5 libapr1
libbind9-60 libbrlapi0.5 libdns69 libisc62 libisccc60 libisccfg62
liblwres60 libmozjs2d
Bom dia.
Nenhuma dúvida é boba. Bobas podem ser as perguntas ;-)
Em 6 de junho de 2011 22:05, Israel Pereira da Silva
chaca...@gmail.comescreveu:
Olá a todos.
Quando executo o aptitude upgrade, sempre reinicio o sistema. É preciso
reiniciar toda vez, sendo que as atualizaçõe são para
:
Bom dia.
Nenhuma dúvida é boba. Bobas podem ser as perguntas ;-)
Em 6 de junho de 2011 22:05, Israel Pereira da Silva
chaca...@gmail.comescreveu:
Olá a todos.
Quando executo o aptitude upgrade, sempre reinicio o sistema. É preciso
reiniciar toda vez, sendo que as atualizaçõe são para
Olá a todos.
Quando executo o aptitude upgrade, sempre reinicio o sistema. É preciso
reiniciar toda vez, sendo que as atualizaçõe são para correções e segurança?
Muito obrigado.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-portuguese-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe
Si aptitude es el metodo recomendado, entonces porque:
1. Sidux recomienda apt-get
2. No reemplazan de una buena vez apt-get por aptitude. Para que tener 2
herramientas que hacen lo mismo ?
El Mon, 04 Apr 2011 09:57:04 -0300, Mario Daniel Carugno escribió:
Si aptitude es el metodo recomendado,
No lo es... o al menos no lo es para actualizar desde lenny a squeeze.
entonces porque:
1. Sidux recomienda apt-get
2. No reemplazan de una buena vez apt-get por aptitude. Para que
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:57:04AM -0300, Mario Daniel Carugno wrote:
Si aptitude es el metodo recomendado, entonces porque:
1. Sidux recomienda apt-get
No conozco aptosid, pero ¿cual es la lógica en que si una distribución
derivada de Debian recomienda algo entonces Debian _deba_ hacer lo
Hola
El 04/04/11 09:15, Fernando C. Estrada escribió:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:57:04AM -0300, Mario Daniel Carugno wrote:
Si aptitude es el metodo recomendado, entonces porque:
1. Sidux recomienda apt-get
Amigo Mario no lo se, yo leí el manual de debian.
No conozco aptosid, pero ¿cual es
El día 4 de abril de 2011 11:37, Juan Lavieri jlavi...@gmail.com escribió:
Hola
El 04/04/11 09:15, Fernando C. Estrada escribió:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:57:04AM -0300, Mario Daniel Carugno wrote:
Si aptitude es el metodo recomendado, entonces porque:
1. Sidux recomienda apt-get
Amigo
El 04/04/11 10:50, Roberto Quiñones escribió:
El día 4 de abril de 2011 11:37, Juan Lavierijlavi...@gmail.com escribió:
Hola
El 04/04/11 09:15, Fernando C. Estrada escribió:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:57:04AM -0300, Mario Daniel Carugno wrote:
Si aptitude es el metodo recomendado,
El día 4 de abril de 2011 12:59, Juan Lavieri jlavi...@gmail.com escribió:
El 04/04/11 10:50, Roberto Quiñones escribió:
El día 4 de abril de 2011 11:37, Juan Lavierijlavi...@gmail.com
escribió:
Hola
El 04/04/11 09:15, Fernando C. Estrada escribió:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:57:04AM
Subject: Re: aptitude upgrade vs. apt-get upgrade
Hola.
Por favor disculpen el top-posting pero el resto está en inglés.
José Gregorio, Kete ya te indicó lo que dice en las FAQ y si seguimos el
hilo en la lista debian-security notaremos que lo que llevó a esta duda
fue un asunto relacionado con
To: xt4...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: aptitude upgrade vs. apt-get upgrade
Hi José,
You can find a reference at http://www.debian.org/doc/FAQ/ch-
pkgtools.en.html#s-aptitude aptitude is the preferred program for daily
package management from console. This FAQ is also available as the
package debian-faq
BlackBerry® de Digitel.
*From: * Kete k...@suddenlink.net
*Date: *Sat, 2 Apr 2011 21:31:59 -0400
*To: *xt4...@yahoo.com
*Subject: *Re: aptitude upgrade vs. apt-get upgrade
Hi José,
You can find a reference at
http
Gregorio.
Enviado desde mi dispositivo movil BlackBerry® de Digitel.
-Original Message-
From: Juan Lavieri jlavi...@gmail.com
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2011 21:42:41
To: debian-user-spanish@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: aptitude upgrade vs. apt-get upgrade
Hola.
Por favor disculpen el top-posting
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 04:54:36PM -0400, Chris Brennan wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Freeman hew...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe
apt-cache rdepends --installed apache2
All this does is list the 4 MPM types repeatedly ...
[snip]
root@Blackdragon:~# apt-cache rdepends
My laptop was off for about a week and when I fired it up today, I ran an
update and then an upgrade on my squeeze install and today I noticed this
[snip]
root@Blackdragon:~# aptitude upgrade
The following packages will be upgraded:
apache2.2-bin bind9-host dnsutils gdm3 google-chrome-stable
On Mi, 30 mar 11, 16:17:52, Chris Brennan wrote:
So why the hell is apache being installed/upgraded on a desktop install w/
no server services?
It's being upgraded, which means it is already installed on your system.
Try 'aptitude why apache2.2-bin', maybe it will shed some light on why
it
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Andrei Popescu
andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mi, 30 mar 11, 16:17:52, Chris Brennan wrote:
So why the hell is apache being installed/upgraded on a desktop install
w/
no server services?
It's being upgraded, which means it is already installed on your
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Chris Brennan xa...@xaerolimit.net wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Andrei Popescu andreimpope...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mi, 30 mar 11, 16:17:52, Chris Brennan wrote:
So why the hell is apache being installed/upgraded on a desktop install
w/
no
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 04:17:52PM -0400, Chris Brennan wrote:
My laptop was off for about a week and when I fired it up today, I ran an
update and then an upgrade on my squeeze install and today I noticed this
[snip]
root@Blackdragon:~# aptitude upgrade
The following packages
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Matt Harrison
matt.harriso...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Chris Brennan xa...@xaerolimit.net wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Andrei Popescu
andreimpope...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mi, 30 mar 11, 16:17:52, Chris Brennan wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Freeman hew...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe
apt-cache rdepends --installed apache2
All this does is list the 4 MPM types repeatedly ...
[snip]
root@Blackdragon:~# apt-cache rdepends --installed apache2
...
apache2-mpm-itk
apache2-mpm-event
On 2011-03-30 15:36:49 Chris Brennan wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Andrei Popescu
andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote:
It's being upgraded, which means it is already installed on your system.
Try 'aptitude why apache2.2-bin', maybe it will shed some light on why
it is installed.
Ya I just
On 27 January 2011 09:37, Wolodja Wentland wolodja.wentl...@ed.ac.uk wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 07:13 +, Kelly Harding wrote:
hi
have been getting following errors when tryign to upgrade my Debian sid box:
dpkg-query: parse error, in file '/var/lib/dpkg/status' near line
[...]
(I must of been sleep deprived when I replied last month as I
inadvertantly replied directly to godo rather than the list as well)
/var/lib/available seems to be empty I noticed.
Removing virtualbox-2.1 from
/var/lib/dpkg/status doesn't make a difference. It seems it is a bug in
virtualbox-2.1,
solved this now. So simple in the end, simply removing the _'s from
the version field in /var/lib/dpkg/status fixed it.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
On 01/27/2011 08:13 AM, Kelly Harding wrote:
hi
have been getting following errors when tryign to upgrade my Debian sid box:
dpkg-query: parse error, in file '/var/lib/dpkg/status' near line
29666 package 'virtualbox-2.1':
error in Version string `2.1.4-42893_Debian_lenny': invalid character
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 07:13 +, Kelly Harding wrote:
hi
have been getting following errors when tryign to upgrade my Debian sid box:
dpkg-query: parse error, in file '/var/lib/dpkg/status' near line
[...]
Results in inability to upgrade any packages on the system.
Anyone come
hi
have been getting following errors when tryign to upgrade my Debian sid box:
dpkg-query: parse error, in file '/var/lib/dpkg/status' near line
29666 package 'virtualbox-2.1':
error in Version string `2.1.4-42893_Debian_lenny': invalid character
in revision number
exim4-config.postinst:
update recupere correctement les fichiers Release/Packages de
mon dépot.
Quand a la suite je fais un aptitude upgrade, aucun de mes paquets n'est
mis a jour. Pourtant leurs versions sont bien anterieures a celles se
trouvant sur le dépot.
Pour être precis, aptitude upgrade ne cite nul part mes
faire les mises a jour que les soucis arrivent.
Aptitude update recupere correctement les fichiers Release/Packages de
mon dépot.
Quand a la suite je fais un aptitude upgrade, aucun de mes paquets n'est
mis a jour. Pourtant leurs versions sont bien anterieures a celles se
trouvant sur le dépot
mises a jour que les soucis arrivent.
Aptitude update recupere correctement les fichiers Release/Packages de
mon dépot.
Quand a la suite je fais un aptitude upgrade, aucun de mes paquets
n'est mis a jour. Pourtant leurs versions sont bien anterieures a
celles se trouvant sur le dépot.
Pour être
Regarde ce que te sort un
apt-cache policy
La priorité pour mon dépot est de 500, comme les autres.
et un
apt-cache policy nom du package
Ici, je vois comme un soucis en effet :
WeblibBase :
Install : (aucun)
Candidat : 1.0.4.0
C'est étrange puisque je viens juste d'installer la
Hello,
I am using Lenny.
When I try to upgrade, this is what happens:
# aptitude safe-upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Reading extended state information
Initializing package states... Done
Reading task descriptions... Done
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 13:57 +, John O Laoi wrote:
# aptitude safe-upgrade
[...]
cvsnt: Conflicts: cvs but 1:1.12.13-12 is installed.
[...]
Any ideas?
I assume that aptitude needs to remove a package in order to satisfy
other packages (cvsnt) dependencies/conflicts. Try full-upgrade
On 2010-03-23 08:57, John O Laoi wrote:
Hello,
I am using Lenny.
When I try to upgrade, this is what happens:
# aptitude safe-upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
[snip]
Resolving dependencies...
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
cvsnt: Conflicts: cvs but 1:1.12.13-12
The following is my sources.list:
$ cat /etc/apt/sources.list
#
# deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 5.0.0 _Lenny_ - Official i386 NETINST
Binary-1 20090214-16:03]/ lenny main
#deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 5.0.0 _Lenny_ - Official i386 NETINST
Binary-1 20090214-16:03]/ lenny main
Why the mixed
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 15:25 +, John O Laoi wrote:
Why the mixed system?
Apologies, I am using Squeeze. The Lenny CDs are commented out.
Important information - make sure to mention it next time.
cvsnt conflicts with cvs. You can't have both at the same time.
Should I remove one of
On 2010-03-23 10:32, Wolodja Wentland wrote:
[snip]
Read the manpage - In a nutshell:
upgrade Deprecated
safe-upgradeUpgrade listed/all packages to newest version, don't
remove packages
don't remove packages
That's why OP is getting the failure. cvs and cvsnt
I upgraded today my testing:
Preparing to replace alsa-utils 1.0.16-2 (using
.../alsa-utils_1.0.19-2_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement alsa-utils ...
dpkg: warning - unable to delete old directory
`/etc/alsa/modprobe-post-install.d': Directory not empty
dpkg: warning - unable to delete old
haldrik escribió:
2009/3/26 Mauro Lizaur lavaram...@debian-community.org
mailto:lavaram...@debian-community.org
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Maximiliano Marin Bustos wrote:
2009/3/26 Mauro Lizaur lavaram...@debian-community.org
mailto:lavaram...@debian-community.org:
2009/3/27 santilistas lis...@gestiong.org
haldrik escribió:
2009/3/26 Mauro Lizaur lavaram...@debian-community.org
mailto:lavaram...@debian-community.org
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Maximiliano Marin Bustos wrote:
2009/3/26 Mauro Lizaur lavaram...@debian-community.org
Hola,
después de instalar lenny stable kde desde el CD que salió el 14 de
febrero, al hacer un aptitude upgrade, me propone desinstalar casi todas
las aplicaciones KDE. ¿A alguien más le ha pasado?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-spanish-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject
2009/3/26 santilistas lis...@gestiong.org:
Hola,
después de instalar lenny stable kde desde el CD que salió el 14 de
febrero, al hacer un aptitude upgrade, me propone desinstalar casi todas
las aplicaciones KDE. ¿A alguien más le ha pasado?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-spanish
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Maximiliano Marin Bustos wrote:
2009/3/26 santilistas lis...@gestiong.org:
Hola,
después de instalar lenny stable kde desde el CD que salió el 14 de
febrero, al hacer un aptitude upgrade, me propone desinstalar casi todas
las aplicaciones KDE. ¿A alguien más le ha
2009/3/26 Mauro Lizaur lavaram...@debian-community.org:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Maximiliano Marin Bustos wrote:
2009/3/26 santilistas lis...@gestiong.org:
Hola,
después de instalar lenny stable kde desde el CD que salió el 14 de
febrero, al hacer un aptitude upgrade, me propone desinstalar
El día 26 de marzo de 2009 15:38, santilistas lis...@gestiong.org escribió:
Hola,
después de instalar lenny stable kde desde el CD que salió el 14 de
febrero, al hacer un aptitude upgrade, me propone desinstalar casi todas
las aplicaciones KDE. ¿A alguien más le ha pasado?
Es probable que
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Maximiliano Marin Bustos wrote:
2009/3/26 Mauro Lizaur lavaram...@debian-community.org:
Holas,
aptitude keep-all evita eso
pero para siempre?
No, solamente lo hace por la vez que estas dist-upgradeando.
Directo de 'man aptitude':
Cancels all scheduled
2009/3/26 Mauro Lizaur lavaram...@debian-community.org
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Maximiliano Marin Bustos wrote:
2009/3/26 Mauro Lizaur lavaram...@debian-community.org:
Holas,
aptitude keep-all evita eso
pero para siempre?
No, solamente lo hace por la vez que estas
2009/3/26 haldrik hald...@gmail.com:
2009/3/26 Mauro Lizaur lavaram...@debian-community.org
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Maximiliano Marin Bustos wrote:
2009/3/26 Mauro Lizaur lavaram...@debian-community.org:
Holas,
aptitude keep-all evita eso
pero para siempre?
No, solamente
Estimado,
Por lo que veo tienes en realidad una ensalada de repositorios con
ramas de Debian, no se si eso este afectando, pero te aconsejaría
dejar solo una rama y las otras de forma temporal, es mi humilde
opinión.
Saludos.
Omar Iturriaga.
El 26/03/2009, a las 20:18, Maximiliano
2009/3/26 Omar Iturriaga omar.iturri...@esdebian.org:
Estimado,
Por lo que veo tienes en realidad una ensalada de repositorios con ramas de
Debian, no se si eso este afectando, pero te aconsejaría dejar solo una rama
y las otras de forma temporal, es mi humilde opinión.
Saludos.
Omar
Si de verdad quisieses tener varias ramas de debian para hacerlo bien sin
generar conflictos usa apt-pinning para las prioridades y luego instala
con -t rama en apt-get/aptitude install.Y por supuesto comprueba bien las
dependencias antes de toquetear nada.
Clara que se puede tener un debian
Le Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 10:45:39AM +0100, Nicolas KOWALSKI a écrit :
J'ai vu que pour changer ce numéro de version, on peut modifier le
fichier debian/changelog. Ok, mais si je fais ça, comment être sûr
qu'une mise-à-jour de sécurité sur le paquet mutt puisse être pris en
compte malgré mon
Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org writes:
Le Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 10:45:39AM +0100, Nicolas KOWALSKI a écrit :
J'ai vu que pour changer ce numéro de version, on peut modifier le
fichier debian/changelog. Ok, mais si je fais ça, comment être sûr
qu'une mise-à-jour de sécurité sur le paquet
Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org writes:
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009, Guy Roussin wrote:
Ces paquets sont installés et ne posent pas de problèmes particuliers.
Seulement, voilà, ils veulent se réinstaller à chaque fois ... pourtant
la version ne change pas ... ils sont d'ailleurs toujours dans le
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009, Guy Roussin wrote:
Ces paquets sont installés et ne posent pas de problèmes particuliers.
Seulement, voilà, ils veulent se réinstaller à chaque fois ... pourtant
la version ne change pas ... ils sont d'ailleurs toujours dans le cache.
C'est parce que les paquets du dépôts
Meanwhile I wrote a bug report:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=513157
And if it is only to get an explanation for this behavior ;-)
Thank you.
Flo.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Flo wrote:
there may again appear files in this directory. I would expect to see
there
files only in the case the update command is interrupted. But may be
something
is wrong with apt-get. Time to file a bug report?
I definitely did this sometimes. Not recently though. I will observe the
there may again appear files in this directory. I would expect to see there
files only in the case the update command is interrupted. But may be something
is wrong with apt-get. Time to file a bug report?
I definitely did this sometimes. Not recently though. I will observe the
behaviour of
Flo wrote:
Also take a look into directory /var/lib/apt/lists/partial. There may
be left
some files. I had to remove them by hand.
I found there more than 400 files, mainly diff files, but some others as
well.
Is it better to remove them???
Flo.
This directory belongs to package
Also take a look into directory /var/lib/apt/lists/partial. There may be left
some files. I had to remove them by hand.
I found there more than 400 files, mainly diff files, but some others as
well.
Is it better to remove them???
Flo.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Friday 23 January 2009, Flo debian...@gmx.at wrote about 'Re: Serious
aptitude upgrade problem':
No, nothing special. I just have different sources in the menu.lst.
Your GRUB configuration (/boot/grub/menu.lst) is an odd place to store apt
sources. Don't you think the normal place (/etc/apt
No, nothing special. I just have different sources in the menu.lst.
Your GRUB configuration (/boot/grub/menu.lst) is an odd place to store apt
sources. Don't you think the normal place (/etc/apt/sources.list) would
be better? :)
Sorry, I was too stupid. I just had to edit menu.lst
Flo wrote:
I don't know the timing, but I wonder if it could be as simple as
mirror skew.
Probably you are right. I did the right thing at the wrong time. And
spent hours on searching a problem which didn't exist.
Nevertheless, thank you for your help.
Flo.
Also take a look
Hi,
I think I am running into a serious upgrade problem.
I am running debian testing and I did the following:
aptitude update
aptitude -d upgrade
Now I have downloaded the packages but instead of saying 'aptitude
upgrade' to finish the upgrade I did:
aptitude update
aptitude upgrade
Flo wrote:
Hi,
I think I am running into a serious upgrade problem.
I am running debian testing and I did the following:
aptitude update
aptitude -d upgrade
Now I have downloaded the packages but instead of saying 'aptitude
upgrade' to finish the upgrade I did:
aptitude update
'aptitude
upgrade' to finish the upgrade I did:
aptitude update
aptitude upgrade
In the meantime I got another package to install but all previously
downloaded packages are marked to be uptodate but they are not.
If I understand correctly: you mean that aptitude doesn't even
attempt
Thanks for your email.
I am running debian testing and I did the following:
aptitude update
aptitude -d upgrade
Now I have downloaded the packages but instead of saying 'aptitude
upgrade' to finish the upgrade I did:
aptitude update
aptitude upgrade
In the meantime I got another package
but instead of saying 'aptitude
upgrade' to finish the upgrade I did:
aptitude update
aptitude upgrade
In the meantime I got another package to install but all previously
downloaded packages are marked to be uptodate but they are not.
If I understand correctly: you mean that aptitude doesn't even
On Thursday 2009 January 22 13:38:27 Flo wrote:
# aptitude upgrade
No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed.
# dpkg -s texlive-doc-base
Status: install ok installed
Version: 2007.dfsg.1-1
# aptitude show texlive-doc-base
State: installed
Version: 2007.dfsg.1-1
# apt-cache policy
It looks like being installed but it isn't.
How do you know that 2007.dfsg.1-1 isn't what is actually installed? All
these seem to agree that it is what is installed. Could you do some sort of
sha1sum test to verify your version of the files shipped in this package
actually differ from
On Thursday 2009 January 22 15:24:57 Flo wrote:
You are right! 2007.dfsg.2-1 is the uptodate version. 2007.dfsg.1-1 is
the old version which is installed and should be upgraded.
According to what you posted earlier today, apt doesn't know about
2007.dfsg.2-1 yet. Assuming you are on Lenny/Sid
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 04:04:28PM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
b...@iguanasuicide.net was heard to say:
On Thursday 2009 January 22 15:24:57 Flo wrote:
The second update must have confused it. How could it happen and, more
important, how can I fix this?
Yeah, I'm not sure how that
According to what you posted earlier today, apt doesn't know about
2007.dfsg.2-1 yet. Assuming you are on Lenny/Sid you might try aptitude
update to resolve that.
Or better: It doesn't know about 2007.dfsg.2-1 anymore. Because it did
know and downloaded the version.
aptitude update:
I don't know the timing, but I wonder if it could be as simple as
mirror skew.
Probably you are right. I did the right thing at the wrong time. And
spent hours on searching a problem which didn't exist.
Nevertheless, thank you for your help.
Flo.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On 2009-01-05 17:42 +0100, Hugh Lawson wrote:
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
A package failed to install. Trying to recover:
Setting up udftools (1.0.0b3-14) ...
Starting udftools packet writing:
/dev/pktcdvd/0=/dev/hdc Device node '0' already in use
invoke-rc.d:
On 2009-01-05 17:42 +0100, Hugh Lawson wrote:
How do I troubleshoot this issue?
'aptitude upgrade' in lenny returned an error, which follows:
Errors were encountered while processing:
udftools
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
A package failed to install. Trying
How do I troubleshoot this issue?
'aptitude upgrade' in lenny returned an error, which follows:
Errors were encountered while processing:
udftools
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
A package failed to install. Trying to recover:
Setting up udftools (1.0.0b3-14
Now it seems I am stuck somehwere in dependency hll..
tried apt-get install -f and aptitude safe-upgrade and aptitue upgrade:
Preconfiguring packages ...
(Reading database ... 283155 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking libavutil49 (from .../libavutil49_0.svn20080206-8_i386.deb)
On 2008-06-22 15:37 +0200, Paul Cartwright wrote:
Now it seems I am stuck somehwere in dependency hll..
tried apt-get install -f and aptitude safe-upgrade and aptitue upgrade:
Preconfiguring packages ...
(Reading database ... 283155 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking
On Sunday 22 June 2008 09:37:05 am Paul Cartwright wrote:
Now it seems I am stuck somehwere in dependency hll..
tried apt-get install -f and aptitude safe-upgrade and aptitue upgrade:
Preconfiguring packages ...
(Reading database ... 283155 files and directories currently installed.)
On Sun June 22 2008, Sven Joachim wrote:
Consider removing the offending lib*cvs* packages from the
debian-multimedia repository.
do I just wait for newer packages??
See the instructions on http://www.debian-multimedia.org/.
when I tried that I get:
Beware : downgrading to these packages
On Sunday 22 June 2008 01:49:37 pm you wrote:
On Sun June 22 2008, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Paul,
See this line:
processing /var/cache/apt/archives/libswscale0_0.svn20080206-8_i386.deb
(--unpack):
trying to overwrite `/usr/lib/libswscale.so.0.5.0', which is also in
package
On Sunday 22 June 2008 02:54:03 pm you wrote:
On Sun June 22 2008, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Glad to do it. In this case, it is NOT badly written packages, but
rather a design choice of Debian Multimedia to go with a lib that is
newer then stable or testing. You will run into this error
1 - 100 of 138 matches
Mail list logo
