aptitude dist-upgrade gives me this:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
epiphany-browser: Conflicts: epiphany-gecko but 2.26.3-2 is installed and it
is kept back.
epiphany-gecko: Depends: epiphany-browser-data (< 2.27) but 2.29.3-1 is to be
installed.
The following actions w
On Dec 19, 2009, at 6:59 AM, Johan Grönqvist wrote:
Rick Thomas skrev:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
xserver-xorg-video-apm: Depends: xserver-xorg-core (>=
2:1.6.99.900) but 2:1.6.5-1 is installed.
and a bunch of other xserver-xorg-video-* packages have the same
prob
Rick Thomas skrev:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
xserver-xorg-video-apm: Depends: xserver-xorg-core (>= 2:1.6.99.900)
but 2:1.6.5-1 is installed.
and a bunch of other xserver-xorg-video-* packages have the same problem.
See news.debian.net at
<http://news.debi
On Friday 18 December 2009 12:12:52 Rick Thomas wrote:
> I understand "normal churn" in testing and unstable, but these
> problems have persisted for over a week.
>
> > The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> > epiphany-extensions-more: Depends: epiph
xserver-xorg-video-tseng xserver-xorg-
video-v4l xserver-xorg-video-vesa
xserver-xorg-video-vmware xserver-xorg-video-voodoo
Then a little later:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
xserver-xorg-video-apm: Depends: xserver-xorg-core (>=
2:1.6.99.900) but 2:1.6.5-1 is
rouble...
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
epiphany-extensions-more: Depends: epiphany-extensions (< 2.27)
but 2.28.1-2 is to be installed.
epiphany-browser: Conflicts: epiphany-gecko but 2.29.3-1 is to be
installed.
grdc: Depends: remmina which is a virtual packa
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Giancarlo Pegoraro
wrote:
>> I'm trying today an upgrade to my testing install after quite a while.
>> What I get is:
>>
>> gnome-network-admin: Depends: gnome-system-tools (= 2.22.1-5) but 2.28.1-1
>> is to be installed.
>> Conflicts: ne
Hi,
Il giorno lun, 16/11/2009 alle 10.42 +0100, Matteo Riva ha scritto:
> I'm trying today an upgrade to my testing install after quite a while.
> What I get is:
>
> gnome-network-admin: Depends: gnome-system-tools (= 2.22.1-5) but
> 2.28.1-1 is to be installed.
>Conflic
I'm trying today an upgrade to my testing install after quite a while.
What I get is:
gnome-network-admin: Depends: gnome-system-tools (= 2.22.1-5) but
2.28.1-1 is to be installed.
Conflicts: network-manager-gnome but 0.7.1-1 is
to be installed.
gnome-system-tools: Confl
23.10.2009 18:03, Paul E Condon kirjoitti:
> On 20091023_171514, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
>>
>>
>> 23.10.2009 17:03, Pedro Insua kirjoitti:
>>> dpkg -L debian-reference-en
>>>
>>
>> I have not this package installed, so says that command. What good does
>> it bring? Documents? I never read documen
On Fri October 23 2009, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
> I have not this package installed, so says that command. What good does
> it bring? Documents? I never read documents from my disk, I read them
> from internet.
once installed, I found you bring up a browser, and go to this web page:
/usr/share/doc
On 20091023_171514, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
>
>
> 23.10.2009 17:03, Pedro Insua kirjoitti:
> > dpkg -L debian-reference-en
> >
>
> I have not this package installed, so says that command. What good does
> it bring? Documents? I never read documents from my disk, I read them
> from internet.
>
Paul Cartwright wrote:
On Fri October 23 2009, Wayne wrote:
As a new user of Debian you would be well advised to install the
debian-reference package. Most, if not all, of your questions are
addressed in that package. I find it useful after 15+ years of running
Debian.
how would one access t
Paul Cartwright wrote:
On Fri October 23 2009, Wayne wrote:
As a new user of Debian you would be well advised to install the
debian-reference package. Most, if not all, of your questions are
addressed in that package. I find it useful after 15+ years of running
Debian.
how would one access t
> How can I go uninstalling some of the unneeded kernels (particularly
> the backports one which didn't meet my needs in the end) and make sure
> that *everything* that got installed by their respective packages -- or
> built against the particular kernel, such as my wireless and graphics
> mod
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 05:15:14PM +0300, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
>
>
> 23.10.2009 17:03, Pedro Insua kirjoitti:
> > dpkg -L debian-reference-en
> >
>
> I have not this package installed, so says that command. What good does
> it bring? Documents? I never read documents from my disk, I read the
23.10.2009 17:03, Pedro Insua kirjoitti:
> dpkg -L debian-reference-en
>
I have not this package installed, so says that command. What good does
it bring? Documents? I never read documents from my disk, I read them
from internet.
I have used linuces from 1994, but Debian only maybe 2 years. Sh
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 09:54:32AM -0400, Paul Cartwright wrote:
> On Fri October 23 2009, Wayne wrote:
> > As a new user of Debian you would be well advised to install the
> > debian-reference package. Most, if not all, of your questions are
> > addressed in that package. I find it useful after
On Fri October 23 2009, Wayne wrote:
> As a new user of Debian you would be well advised to install the
> debian-reference package. Most, if not all, of your questions are
> addressed in that package. I find it useful after 15+ years of running
> Debian.
how would one access this package? I seem
Klistvud wrote:
Howdie, fellow Debianites!
My daily question for today:
this morning, another kernel update was proposed to me by the Gnome
update applet. As I already have three kernels on my Lenny system (the
2.6.26-1-amd64 and 2.6.26-2-amd64, as well as a a backported 2.6.30-
bpo.2-amd64),
On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 10:29:31 +0200
Klistvud wrote:
Hello Klistvud,
> say, 'lib/modules/2.6.30-bpo.2-amd64/misc/fglrx.ko'? Will it also
> clean my /boot/grub/menu.lst of the entries no longer needed?
That'll all be taken care of for you. After all, it wouldn't be
much of a package manager if yo
Klistvud wrote:
> Dne, 23. 10. 2009 12:49:12 je Johannes Wiedersich napisal(a):
>> Why don't you just give it a try and follow up with any questions or
>> problems you face?
>
> Because I'm not yet familiar enough with Debian (or GNU/Linux, for that
> matter) to know where to look for leftovers o
23.10.2009 15:08, Alexey Salmin kirjoitti:
> AFAIK aptitude will not allow you to leave youtself without any kernel easily
> :)
> You can see which kernel packages are installed on your machine using
> dpkg -l 'linux-image*'
Thanks! I'll use that for now.
--
http://www.iki.fi/jarif/
You wil
//www.iki.fi/jarif/
>>>
>>> You're currently going through a difficult transition period called "Life."
>>>
>>>
>>
>> That's definitely not a right way. Generally, modifying system files
>> manually is usually a bad idea.
>&
23.10.2009 14:23, Klistvud kirjoitti:
> Dne, 23. 10. 2009 12:49:12 je Johannes Wiedersich napisal(a):
>>
>> Why don't you just give it a try and follow up with any questions or
>> problems you face?
>>
>> --
>> Johannes
>>
>
> Because I'm not yet familiar enough with Debian (or GNU/Linux, for t
Dne, 23. 10. 2009 12:49:12 je Johannes Wiedersich napisal(a):
>
> Why don't you just give it a try and follow up with any questions or
> problems you face?
>
> --
> Johannes
>
Because I'm not yet familiar enough with Debian (or GNU/Linux, for that
matter) to know where to look for leftovers o
Klistvud wrote:
> Dne, 23. 10. 2009 10:06:48 je Dale napisal(a):
>
>> the easiest way is to in synaptics just search for 'linux' and remove
>> the kernels you not need, ie linux images and linux headers etc for
>> the versions you want.
>>
>
> Thanx. Will that take care automagically for the rela
Dne, 23. 10. 2009 10:06:48 je Dale napisal(a):
>
> the easiest way is to in synaptics just search for 'linux' and remove
> the kernels you not need, ie linux images and linux headers etc for
> the versions you want.
>
Thanx. Will that take care automagically for the related kernel modules
and
2009/10/23 Klistvud :
> Howdie, fellow Debianites!
>
> My daily question for today:
>
> this morning, another kernel update was proposed to me by the Gnome
> update applet. As I already have three kernels on my Lenny system (the
> 2.6.26-1-amd64 and 2.6.26-2-amd64, as well as a a backported 2.6.30-
Howdie, fellow Debianites!
My daily question for today:
this morning, another kernel update was proposed to me by the Gnome
update applet. As I already have three kernels on my Lenny system (the
2.6.26-1-amd64 and 2.6.26-2-amd64, as well as a a backported 2.6.30-
bpo.2-amd64), my grub startup l
On Fri,11.Sep.09, 13:11:37, Liviu Andronic wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 9/11/09, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> > aptitude -s install '~i~R^$'
> >
> > If you like the list of actions that aptitude shows in response to that
> > command then you can run it again without "-s".
> >
> > I prefer to use the inte
On 9/11/09, Liviu Andronic wrote:
> How do I tell aptitude that I prefer testing packages? From what I
> see, it would currently bump everything to sid.
>
OK, I found.
aptitude -t testing
Liviu
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe".
Hello,
On 9/11/09, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> aptitude -s install '~i~R^$'
>
> If you like the list of actions that aptitude shows in response to that
> command then you can run it again without "-s".
>
> I prefer to use the interactive interface of aptitude if I want to carry
> out such fine-gr
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 09:55:01 +0100, Liviu Andronic wrote:
> Dear all
> How do I get upgrade all the dependencies of a given package to their
> newest available version? I do not want in the process to upgrade the
> entire distribution. I am looking something similar to Gentoo&#x
Dear all
How do I get upgrade all the dependencies of a given package to their
newest available version? I do not want in the process to upgrade the
entire distribution. I am looking something similar to Gentoo's
emerge -av -DNu
Thank you
Liviu
--
Do you know how to read?
Hi Debian fellows,
is it possible that you can add two more dependencies to synaptic to
make the Adobe flash plugin from the debian (non free) repo proper
running? (tested with Lenny x386 32 Bits)
libnspr4-dev
libnss3-dev
background: tested with manual install of the Adobe flash player
file
On 2009-07-28 11:39, AG wrote:
[snip]
Phew! Thanks Ron. I thought that I'd bust my new toy already!! :)
Is this pretty much what one can expect using sid/ unstable then -
packages being in transition for a few days until an upstream maintainer
sorts things out? If so, then the earlier thread
that you have
requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
or been moved out of Incoming.
The following information may help to resolve the situation:
The following packages have unmet dependencies.
amarok
requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
or been moved out of Incoming.
The following information may help to resolve the situation:
The following packages have unmet dependencies.
amarok: Depends: amarok-common
you are using the unstable
distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
or been moved out of Incoming.
The following information may help to resolve the situation:
The following packages have unmet dependencies.
amarok: Depends: amarok-common (= 1.4.10-3) but it is not going
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 02:23:31PM -0500, "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr."
was heard to say:
> In <20090529013505.ga12...@emurlahn.burrows.local>, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > Adding versioned Provides would affect all the software that tries
> >to process Debian packages and reason about their dependency
2009 at 09:02:59AM -0500, "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr."
>> was heard to say:
>> >> Isn't that supposed to change in the future (but perhaps not before
>> >> Squeeze) so that we can have versioned dependencies on virtual
>> >> packages?
>>
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 08:35 -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 09:02:59AM -0500, "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr."
> was heard to say:
> > Isn't that supposed to change in the future (but perhaps not before
> > Squeeze)
> > so that we can
Web
> content engine library for Gtk+
> ii libwebkit-1.0-common 1.1.7-1 Web
> content engine library for Gtk+ - data files
>
>
> What about Midori:
>
> # apt-get install midori
>
> The following packages have un
; >> Isn't that supposed to change in the future (but perhaps not before
> >> Squeeze) so that we can have versioned dependencies on virtual packages?
> >
> > Yes. It's been supposed to change in the future for at least ten
> >years. :-)
>
>
In <20090528153521.ga31...@emurlahn.burrows.local>, Daniel Burrows wrote:
>On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 09:02:59AM -0500, "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr."
was heard to say:
>> Isn't that supposed to change in the future (but perhaps not before
>> Squeeze) so that we can ha
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 09:02:59AM -0500, "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr."
was heard to say:
> Isn't that supposed to change in the future (but perhaps not before Squeeze)
> so that we can have versioned dependencies on virtual packages?
Yes. It's been supposed to change
ip
>>exists.
>
> Isn't that supposed to change in the future (but perhaps not before Squeeze)
> so that we can have versioned dependencies on virtual packages?
I don't know of anyone working on it. This has been on people's
wish list for more than ten years: http:/
es relationship.
>
> Also, a request for a package with a version constraint can never
>be satisfied by another package, even if a Provides relationship
>exists.
Isn't that supposed to change in the future (but perhaps not before Squeeze)
so that we can have versioned dependencies on v
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:59:50AM -0500, "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr."
was heard to say:
> You have the package "libwebkit-1.0-2" version "1.1.7-1". But, the package
> "midori" needs the package "libwebkit-1.0-1" version "1.0.1" or greater.
> Package names are only compared for equality; they are
1.1.7-1
>
>What about Midori:
># apt-get install midori
>
>The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> midori: Depends: libwebkit-1.0-1 (>= 1.0.1) but it is not installable
>
>To me, 1.0-2 >= 1.0-1.
Careful. Those numbers that you are comparing aren
eb content engine library for Gtk+ ii
> libwebkit-1.0-common 1.1.7-1 Web
> content engine library for Gtk+ - data files
>
>
> What about Midori:
>
> # apt-get install midori
>
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> mido
1.1.7-1 Web
content engine library for Gtk+ - data files
What about Midori:
# apt-get install midori
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
midori: Depends: libwebkit-1.0-1 (>= 1.0.1) but it is not installable
To me, 1.0-2 >= 1.0-1.
--force-yes doesn't
I've been trying to package some modules
$ dh-make-perl --cpan Template::Latex --dh 7 --requiredeps
[...]
Needs the following debian packages: libtemplate-perl
$ dpkg -l libtemplate-perl
ii libtemplate-pe 2.19-1.1lenny1 template processing system written in
perl
How do I make dh-make-perl see t
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 03:52:48PM -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> As far as a meta-package goes, choose your poison: kde-minimal
> kde-standard kde-full
Thanks, this was exactly what I needed. Much appreciated!
--
"Oh, look: rocks!"
-- Doctor Who, "Destiny of the Daleks"
--
T
In <20090519200949.gq25...@penguin.codegnome.org>, Todd A. Jacobs wrote:
>I was running an aptitude upgrade, and was finding a lot of unresolved
>dependencies because kde is no longer in testing or unstable. Has it
>been replaced by kde4?
Yes. Some libraries will hang around for a
I was running an aptitude upgrade, and was finding a lot of unresolved
dependencies because kde is no longer in testing or unstable. Has it
been replaced by kde4? If so, what packages do I need to install to get
a complete kde system nowadays?
--
"Oh, look: rocks!"
--
nd used before).
> > > >>> I'm using sid, and in repo there is version 0.6.8-2+b1 of
> > > >>> soundtracker. But, I get missing dependencies:
>
> [...]
>
> > > >> You could also try the soundtracker-gtk2 package mentioned in bug
n Kłapkowski wrote:
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> I would like to install soundtracker (it's one of the best tracker
> > >>> I've heard and used before).
> > >>> I'm using sid, and in repo there is version 0.6.
uld like to install soundtracker (it's one of the best tracker
> >>> I've heard and used before).
> >>> I'm using sid, and in repo there is version 0.6.8-2+b1 of soundtracker.
> >>> But, I get missing dependencies:
>
> [...]
>
> >
>> I've heard and used before).
>>> I'm using sid, and in repo there is version 0.6.8-2+b1 of soundtracker.
>>> But, I get missing dependencies:
[...]
>>> How I can install missing dependencies or newer version of soundtracker?
>>>
>>
, I get missing dependencies:
# sudo apt-get install soundtracker
...
Nast�puj�ce pakiety maj� niespe�nione zaleşno�ci:
soundtracker: Wymaga: gdk-imlib11 ale nie da si� go zainstalowa�
Wymaga: libart2 (>= 1.2.13-5) ale nie da si� go zainstalowa�
Wymaga: libgdk-
On Sunday 12 April 2009 16:00, Marcin Kłapkowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to install soundtracker (it's one of the best tracker I've
> heard and used before).
> I'm using sid, and in repo there is version 0.6.8-2+b1 of soundtracker.
> But, I get missing
Hi,
I would like to install soundtracker (it's one of the best tracker I've
heard and used before).
I'm using sid, and in repo there is version 0.6.8-2+b1 of soundtracker.
But, I get missing dependencies:
# sudo apt-get install soundtracker
...
Następujące pakiety mają niespełn
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 16:00:14 +0200, Marcin Kłapkowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to install soundtracker (it's one of the best tracker I've
> heard and used before).
> I'm using sid, and in repo there is version 0.6.8-2+b1 of soundtracker.
> But, I get mis
Umarzuki Mochlis escribió:
> [snipped]
>>
>>
>> Mix too many things?
>>
>> Lenny has amarok 1.4 with kde 3.5; I'm not surprised that this doesn't
>> mix well with amarok 2.0, which probably comes with kde 4.2. Make up
>> your mind if you'd like to stick with lenny or go with sid, testing,
>> experi
[snipped]
>
>
>
> Mix too many things?
>
> Lenny has amarok 1.4 with kde 3.5; I'm not surprised that this doesn't
> mix well with amarok 2.0, which probably comes with kde 4.2. Make up
> your mind if you'd like to stick with lenny or go with sid, testing,
> experimental
>
> HTH,
> Johannes
Gue
se a=sid
> Pin-Priority: 600
>
> Package: *
> Pin: release a=experimental
> Pin-Priority: 550
>
>
> when I ran safe-upgrade, I got a gadjilion of upgrade list which downloads
> from experimental.
>
> .
> Resol
: 550
when I ran safe-upgrade, I got a gadjilion of upgrade list which downloads
from experimental.
.
Resolving
dependencies...
open: 119; closed: 361; defer: 658; conflict:
3 .Resolving
dependencies...
Resolving
depende
->>In response to your message<<-
--received from Ink Bottle--
>
>
> I've found this little script around something
> I've heared about recently; it's a command dedicated
> to check dependencies.
> I don't know it it can be of some use.
>
I've found this little script around something
I've heared about recently; it's a command dedicated
to check dependencies.
I don't know it it can be of some use.
It's been hard to make it work (that's the bad part :) ).
$ export LANG=C; 2>/dev/null apt-cache
->>In response to your message<<-
--received from Chris Burkhardt--
>
> Paul Yeatman wrote:
> [...]
> >> There is a note in the man page about putting the --no-act flag before the
> >> action:
> >>
> >> $ sudo dpkg --no-act -i texlive-base_2007.dfsg.1-2_all.deb
> >>
> >> Does that make it beha
...
> > $ echo $?
> > 0
> >
> > tells me nothing about lacking dependencies.
Apparently, this has been observed and noted for a long time (at least
since 2002) as these 3 merged bugs show.
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=55364
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugrepo
Paul Yeatman wrote:
[...]
>> There is a note in the man page about putting the --no-act flag before the
>> action:
>>
>> $ sudo dpkg --no-act -i texlive-base_2007.dfsg.1-2_all.deb
>>
>> Does that make it behave as expected?
>
> I wish but sadly no:
>
> $ sudo dpkg --no-act -i texlive-base_2007.d
->>In response to your message<<-
--received from Michael M. Moore--
>
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Paul Yeatman wrote:
> > Hi, I'm wondering if there is a command I can run on a debian
> > package that would test for whether all dependencies of that p
->>In response to your message<<-
--received from Chris Burkhardt--
>
> Paul Yeatman wrote:
> > Hi, I'm wondering if there is a command I can run on a debian package that
> > would test for whether all dependencies of that package are already
> >
->>In response to your message<<-
--received from Jimmy Johnson--
>
> Paul Yeatman wrote:
> > Hi, I'm wondering if there is a command I can run on a debian package
> that would test for whether all dependencies of that package are already
> installed on the
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Paul Yeatman wrote:
> Hi, I'm wondering if there is a command I can run on a debian package that
> would test for whether all dependencies of that package are already installed
> on the system without actually installing the package if so. This m
Paul Yeatman wrote:
> Hi, I'm wondering if there is a command I can run on a debian package that
> would test for whether all dependencies of that package are already installed
> on the system without actually installing the package if so. This mailing
> list thread http:/
Paul Yeatman wrote:
> Hi, I'm wondering if there is a command I can run on a debian package
that would test for whether all dependencies of that package are already
installed on the system without actually installing the package if so.
This mailing list thread
http://lists.debian.or
Hi, I'm wondering if there is a command I can run on a debian package that
would test for whether all dependencies of that package are already installed
on the system without actually installing the package if so. This mailing list
thread http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2006/09/msg
On Sat,12.Jul.08, 22:55:02, Shachar Or wrote:
> Hello!
>
> package 'foo' from etch-backports depends on package 'bar' from either etch
> or
> etch-backports.
> Both packages are available to apt from both etch and etch-backports.
>
> When I type 'aptitude -t etch-backports install foo', which v
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Shachar Or wrote:
> Hello!
>
> package 'foo' from etch-backports depends on package 'bar' from either etch
> or
> etch-backports.
> Both packages are available to apt from both etch and etch-backports.
>
> When I type 'aptitude -t etch-backports in
Hello!
package 'foo' from etch-backports depends on package 'bar' from either etch or
etch-backports.
Both packages are available to apt from both etch and etch-backports.
When I type 'aptitude -t etch-backports install foo', which version of 'bar'
will be installed, the etch one or the etch-ba
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 14:27 +1000, Keith Bates wrote:
>
>> The version of wine I'm trying to install is 1.0.0.
>> Debian version is testing.
>
> Aah, that's probably your problem. 1.0.0 is in unstable. 1.0rc2-1 is in
> testing
On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 14:27 +1000, Keith Bates wrote:
> The version of wine I'm trying to install is 1.0.0.
> Debian version is testing.
Aah, that's probably your problem. 1.0.0 is in unstable. 1.0rc2-1 is in
testing. Unstable does not play well with others: Don't try to pull
unstable sources
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 07:45:17 +0200
Sven Joachim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2008-06-23 07:37 +0200, Keith Bates wrote:
>
> > apt-cache policy wine
> >
> > Installed: (none)
> > Candidate: 1.0.0~winehq0~debian~4.0-1
> > Version table:
> > 1.0.0~winehq0~debian~4.0-1 0
> > 500 h
On 2008-06-23 07:37 +0200, Keith Bates wrote:
> apt-cache policy wine
>
> Installed: (none)
> Candidate: 1.0.0~winehq0~debian~4.0-1
> Version table:
> 1.0.0~winehq0~debian~4.0-1 0
> 500 http://wine.budgetdedicated.com etch/main Packages
> 1.0-rc2-1 0
> 500 http://ftp.
.
> > The following information may help to resolve the situation:
> >
> > The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> > wine: Depends: libldap2 (>= 2.1.17-1) but it is not installable
> > E: Broken packages
> >
> >
> > The version of wine I&
on it is extremely likely that
> the package is simply not installable and a bug report against
> that package should be filed.
> The following information may help to resolve the situation:
>
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> wine: Depends: libldap2 (>= 2.1.17-1)
gt;
> Since you only requested a single operation it is extremely likely
> that the package is simply not installable and a bug report against
> that package should be filed.
> The following information may help to resolve the situation:
>
> The following packages have unmet de
ve not yet been created
or been moved out of Incoming.
Since you only requested a single operation it is extremely likely that
the package is simply not installable and a bug report against
that package should be filed.
The following information may help to resolve the situation:
The following pac
On Sun June 22 2008 19:05:48 Keith Bates wrote:
> Is it possible to install wine on debian at the moment?
>
> Wine depends on libldap2
> libldap2 conflicts with libldap-2.4-2
> libldap-2.4-2 is needed by about 100 other programs including cups,
> evolution, samba, grip...
>
> Obviously I've missed
Is it possible to install wine on debian at the moment?
Wine depends on libldap2
libldap2 conflicts with libldap-2.4-2
libldap-2.4-2 is needed by about 100 other programs including cups,
evolution, samba, grip...
Obviously I've missed something basic here! Can somebody please
enlighten me?
Than
eather-plugin{a}
0 packages upgraded, 29 newly installed, 0 to remove and 2 not upgraded.
Need to get 4046kB of archives. After unpacking 10.2MB will be used.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libxfcegui4-4: Conflicts: libxfcegui4-3 but 4.2.2-1 is to be installed.
libxfce4util4: Con
ce4-systemload-plugin{a}
> xfce4-verve-plugin{a} xfce4-wavelan-plugin{a} xfce4-weather-plugin{a}
> 0 packages upgraded, 29 newly installed, 0 to remove and 2 not upgraded.
> Need to get 4046kB of archives. After unpacking 10.2MB will be used.
> The following packages have unmet dep
Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 07:06:15AM +0100, andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to
say:
Can someone please advise on the best way to handle the following
situation of unmet dependencies:
$ sudo apt-get install xfce4-systemload-plugin xfce4-goodies
Reading package
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 07:06:15AM +0100, andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to
say:
> Can someone please advise on the best way to handle the following
> situation of unmet dependencies:
>
> $ sudo apt-get install xfce4-systemload-plugin xfce4-goodies
> Reading package lis
Sven Joachim wrote:
On 2008-04-24 08:06 +0200, andy wrote:
Can someone please advise on the best way to handle the following
situation of unmet dependencies:
$ sudo apt-get install xfce4-systemload-plugin xfce4-goodies
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state
On 2008-04-24 08:06 +0200, andy wrote:
> Can someone please advise on the best way to handle the following
> situation of unmet dependencies:
>
> $ sudo apt-get install xfce4-systemload-plugin xfce4-goodies
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree
> Read
501 - 600 of 1353 matches
Mail list logo
