The filters file is read by Configuration class (apt-pkg), whose
format is defined in apt.conf(5). Besides being syntactically
incorrect [1] there are other issues that prohibit reliable parsing of
the data.
For example, this pattern from one of the standard filters combines
several
I strongly suggest not to not implement any work-around or extra
precautions in either the GUI or current reader code until the design
issues with the filter file can be looked at.
That should be:
I strongly suggest not to implement any work-around …
--
You received this bug notification
We will not allow newlines in the name filter, see above.
Such characters may still enter the filter file through other means.
This will not resolve the segfault, only reduce the likely-hood of
hitting it.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
Please demonstrate how this is caused by a bug in aptitude.
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/271246
Title:
On 8 December 2012 14:59, sdurranc 779...@bugs.launchpad.net wrote:
** Changed in: synaptic (Ubuntu)
Status: Fix Committed = Fix Released
Thats interesting. Did I miss a release somewhere?
status fixcommitted
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
[1] indicates to have a sponsor upload to -proposed before the Sru team
will review. It states there is no need to wait. The package is unusable
on m-a systems, in Ubuntu main, this upload is a self-contained fix: why
you consider it so unsuitable?
If the package does not get to -proposed, how
Those files are not really helpful. To investigate a segfault we need
the backtrace (stack trace), which you can produce by installing debug
symbols and using gdb if required; see the previous links I posted.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which
On 6 December 2012 05:09, Thomas Bushnell, BSG
1086...@bugs.launchpad.net wrote:
If a package has a space in its Filename: entry in the Packages file,
you get errors on HTTP resolution.
Why are there spaces, is it due to a service that munges filenames
with “s/+/ /g” on upload? Provide
On 6 December 2012 10:00, Thomas Bushnell, BSG
1086...@bugs.launchpad.net wrote:
the problem as I
encountered it concerned a repo with spaces in some directory names.
Debian Policy doesn't address Packages files at all, nor archive
layout.
Appendix D, Control files and their fields?
--
You
Also, there is this statement in section 5.1:
Whitespace must not appear inside names (of packages,
architectures, files or anything else) or version numbers, or
between the characters of multi-character version
relationships.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
Ok, I extracted just the stacktrace for convenience. For now, that
should be enough to investigate the issue.
** Changed in: synaptic (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete = New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
** Attachment added: stacktrace.txt
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/synaptic/+bug/873860/+attachment/3452706/+files/stacktrace.txt
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/873860
Public bug reported:
Separated from bug #1086997.
The original report involves a repository where some path names contain spaces.
These end up in the Packages file like:
Filename: foo/bar baz/file.deb
APT considers the entire line after “Filename: ” to be a single filename
value, and issues
On 6 December 2012 12:05, Thomas Bushnell, BSG
1086...@bugs.launchpad.net wrote:
Thanks for the reference.
Yes, who doesn't enjoy a good read of policy documents?
I apologize for missing section D; it's not
relevant here, but I had forgotten that it has those things. It doesn't
actually say
On 6 December 2012 13:27, Daniel Hartwig mand...@gmail.com wrote:
Regardless of how debian-policy defines valid filenames /in control
files/, the APT Acquire system and HTTP method can be used outside the
context of debian control files, and should still issue
correctly-formed HTTP requests
On 6 December 2012 14:06, Thomas Bushnell BSG
1086...@bugs.launchpad.net wrote:
And in my case, there was an independent
bug *producing* the directories with spaces in them which I did not
intend.
Ah, I had thought you were stuck with those directories!
--
You received this bug notification
Hiding such menu items is a local policy decision.
There is no way to reliable tell whether any particular user can gain
the necessary privledges required by a given program. As you point
out, synaptic is still useful to non-privledged users to browse
available packages.
Suggest closing.
--
Ok. This will require a crash report (backtrace, etc.). Please see
these resources for how to collect this information:
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs#Reporting_an_application_crash
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingProgramCrash
The second link in particular contains
From the Debian report:
This was reported upstream, where they suggested that the libgc 7.2
release might fix the problem. I tested that on harris.debian.org
(armhf), and make check finished without error.
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #682919
Does the same also happen if you install using apt-get, and give the
same answer:
$ sudo apt-get remove --purge ubuntu-orchestra-provisioning-server
…
$ sudo apt-get install ubuntu-orchestra-provisioning-server
…
Set the domain name for DHCP Clients: ORCHESTRA
Also, is the domain you
However if anyone else has a better idea, we could also try changing
the label Unchanged to something like Not selected for upgrade, or
something like that.
There is some utility to including these packages, provided that the
label is clear. Aptitude also includes such packages in it's preview
On 16 November 2012 18:05, Robert Roth evf...@gmail.com wrote:
and as there is no status
called Waiting-for-feedback-on-how-to-properly-fix-this-without-causing-
regressions-for-many-people
Confirmed or triaged is still appropriate for that. The issue itself
is not in doubt and we don't want
On 16 November 2012 20:13, Robert Roth evf...@gmail.com wrote:
Easy decision to change the label, hard decision to find out what to change
it to be informative, concise, and not too technical.
Maybe :-) Let's see what some other programs say…
apt-get: The following packages have been kept
That fails on package coniguration on debconf step domain name for
DHCP-clients.
I give ORCHESTRA to this configuration step and the dialog freezes.
Are you saying that, when prompted for the domain name, you input
“ORCHESTRA”, and the installation does not continue?
** Changed in: synaptic
** Package changed: synaptic (Ubuntu) = texinfo (Ubuntu)
** Changed in: texinfo (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete = New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/734971
Title:
cannot update
On 15 November 2012 13:41, artur bryczek arturbryc...@gmail.com wrote:
** Changed in: synaptic (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Fix Released
That's fast. Care to elaborate on how this has been fixed?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
On 13 November 2012 21:40, v1nce 1077...@bugs.launchpad.net wrote:
I don't agree. I don't know if this is because of french translation but the
text is clearly misleading to me.
mysql-server-5.5: ...
Depends: mysql-client-5.5 (= 5.5.24-0ubuntu0.12.04.1) mais
la version
On 14 November 2012 04:30, Brian Murray br...@ubuntu.com wrote:
I've a system I've been upgrading since Feisty (or maybe Edgy), no
reinstalling to a new hard drive silliness, and the output of Steve's
command was: 1117.
I also use update-manager and not aptitude.
I have refiled the aptdaemon
Test case: https://bugs.launchpad.net/aptdaemon/+bug/1078544
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/300718
Title:
sometimes sets dependency packages to manual install
To manage
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #435069
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=435069
** Also affects: apt (Debian) via
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=435069
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
You received this bug notification because you
On 12 November 2012 21:05, v1nce 1077...@bugs.launchpad.net wrote:
I'm not sure but I think I tried apt-get install -f before manual
installation (with no luck).
Now when I run apt-get install -f it's ok (0,0,0).
I don't really understand what it complained for as I got all the
missing
That file is an example, not an actual init script. It is not intended
to be run and should not be executable.
** Changed in: sysvinit (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 42178 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/42178
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 42178
apt-get doesn't use the same pinning as synaptic
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
As Michael mentioned, you should install keys for repositories that are
signed. For repositories that are not signed, where you trust both the
repository and your connection to it, sources.list supports this syntax
since apt 0.9 (0.8.16~exp3):
deb [trusted=yes] http://host/path sid main
This is
Aptitude also has private holds that apt is unaware of, and receives a
lot of bugs about this issue. Based on the large number of reports over
the years, has the time come to update aptitude and synaptic to use
these global apt holds?
Michael, I am glad to take on this task in synaptic also, if
Still found in synaptic/0.75.13.
The menu item is “Package/Lock Version”. Activating this will lock a
package to it's current version using APT “pinning” (see
apt_preferences(5), although that is really an implementation detail).
The status filter, “Pinned”, selects only packages that are
The filter is working as expected for me using synaptic/0.75.13. Please
confirm if this is still an issue.
** Changed in: synaptic (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
On 12 November 2012 06:11, v1nce 1077...@bugs.launchpad.net wrote:
I fixed this by using dpkg --force-depends -i
mysql-server_5.5.28-0ubuntu0.12.04.2_all.deb
Although that stops dpkg complaining, the problem likely still exists
and is maybe worse. Better to use:
# apt-get install -f
to make
Fixed in distcc/3.1-4.2, appearing in Quantal and later. The
include_server and PYTHON variables in /usr/bin/distcc-pump both contain
the correct values.
distcc (3.1-4.2) unstable; urgency=low
* Non-maintainer upload.
* Move distcc-pump python modules to private path (/usr/lib/distcc-pump)
** Patch removed: precise.debdiff
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/aptitude/+bug/831768/+attachment/3427352/+files/precise.debdiff
** Patch added: precise.debdiff
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/aptitude/+bug/831768/+attachment/3429394/+files/precise.debdiff
--
You
** Description changed:
- I tried to start distcc-pump inclusion server and got the following:
+ [Impact]
+ Users can not use distcc-pump due to problems with python version
+ hardcoding. Subsequent “fixes” to bump the version only fail later.
+
+ Instead of constantly hardcoding newer
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 511585 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/511585
Combining this report with bug #511585 since the same patch fixes them.
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 511585
Unable to start pump server because of python version mismatch
--
You
** Description changed:
[Impact]
- Users can not use distcc-pump due to problems with python version
- hardcoding. Subsequent “fixes” to bump the version only fail later.
+ Using distcc-pump is a significant speed gain with a large compile farm.
+
+ Ubuntu users can not use distcc-pump due
This is the patch used in 3.1-4.2.
** Patch added: python-fix.diff
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/distcc/+bug/511585/+attachment/3429478/+files/python-fix.diff
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
** Changed in: distcc (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/592933
Title:
distcc doesn't report enough information via avahi
To manage notifications
** Changed in: distcc (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/482571
Title:
package distcc 3.1-2 fails to purge if distccd is running
To manage
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1066557
Title:
software index is broken
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 459998 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/459998
It is not incorrect for distccd to have a home of /. Affected users
should upgrade to davfs2 (≥ 1.4.7-1) or use the option ignore_home, as
documented in davfs2.conf(5).
** Changed in: distcc (Ubuntu)
I suggest that any non-trivial setup or large network use DMUCS [1] in
addition to distcc. This is a system that provides network-wide load
balancing and central monitoring.
[1] http://dmucs.sourceforge.net/
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #491175
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=491175
** Also affects: distcc (Debian) via
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=491175
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
You received this bug notification because
Works on my machine without setting DISTCC_DIR and compiling as the
same user that runs distccmon.
Anything particular about your situation?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/192023
One year after this bug is filed, upstream documents using SSH
connection sharing in the FAQ [1]. This looks like the most sensible
way to gain access control without large overhead.
[1] http://distcc.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/doc/web/faq.html
** Changed in: distcc (Ubuntu)
Status:
Actually I am not sure this was ever broken, the original report looks
more like a misunderstanding. By design, you can not monitor jobs
issued by another user unless you share DISTCC_DIR with that user. This
will only monitor jobs issued from the local machine, it does not
monitor the total
** Description changed:
[Impact]
* Inability to use aptitude on multi-arch systems. Any action which
results in a packaging conflict, or otherwise broken package, invokes
the problem resolver which will proceed to remove *all* foreign-arch
packages.
The packages are removed
** Tags removed: verification-needed
** Tags added: verification-done
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/975793
Title:
'aptitude safe-upgrade -d -y' enters infinite loop
To manage
On 7 November 2012 06:25, Steve Langasek steve.langa...@canonical.com wrote:
- upgrading packages with python-aptdaemon (e.g. via
software-center). [2]
I use update-manager for my upgrades, not software-center. Does the same
issue apply?
Looking quickly at
Public bug reported:
Package: synaptic
Version: 0.75.13
(Filed only for documenting. I suspect the developers are already aware
of this, and don't expect any reasonable solution.)
The synaptic selections interface in common/rpackagelister.cc
(writeSelections, readSelections) has this
I use update-manager for my upgrades, not software-center. Does the same
issue apply?
The synaptic backend also causes trouble, since it uses a
--set-selections interface that, like dpkg, does not support keeping
packages marked auto-installed. See bug #300718 (update manager) and
bug
Note that the aptdaemon backend suffers from this problem as well due to
[1] (patch).
A similar patch could be applied to InstallBackendSynaptic.py to track
which packages were previously auto-installed and make sure they are
marked as such afterwards. Otherwise, perhaps consider to just drop
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 300718 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/300718
** This bug is no longer a duplicate of bug 450914
update-manager doesn't mark new packages as auto-installed
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 300718
sometimes sets dependency packages to
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 300718 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/300718
** This bug is no longer a duplicate of bug 450914
update-manager doesn't mark new packages as auto-installed
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 300718
sometimes sets dependency packages to
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 300718 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/300718
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 300718
sometimes sets dependency packages to manual install
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
On 6 November 2012 08:31, Steve Langasek steve.langa...@canonical.com wrote:
FWIW, we seem to be doing a poor job in general of getting packages
correctly marked for autoremoval. On my desktop system:
$ for pkg in $(apt-mark showmanual) ; do grep-status -FPackage -X $pkg -a
-FSection -X
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #432017
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=432017
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #685044
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=685044
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs,
Trevor Adams tr...@cs.drexel.edu wrote:
3) Command run: aptitude -o 'Dpkg::Options::=--force-confdef' update
Nested quotes are invalid here. They are shell syntax and not
interpretted by APT.
The syntax for this option is in apt.conf(5). Multiple options should
be passed using multiple -o
[…] or an error message detailing that the argument passed is invalid
due to the extra set of quotations.
Not really possible for APT to check the validity of another programs
options. However, it can check that the exit status of this call to
dpkg is 0 and issue an error or warning otherwise.
A separate system runs the above command […]
Which is broken, and I trust that you have filed a separate bug report
for that system.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1075260
Title:
Daniel, do you want to do a stable release update (SRU)?
No. I do not use Ubuntu.
A debdiff and a test case is needed for a SRU
Recommend that an affected user running Lucid prepare the test case and
for bug #521165 also.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
On 1 November 2012 10:23, Scott Ritchie scottritc...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Upstream says even libgettext isn't needed at runtime, apparently --
Wine only needs to build the translations into the windows format, and
then just uses those. I'm prepping an SRU.
Makes sense. The Debian packaging does
I am double-checking with
upstream now though.
Appreciated.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/954029
Title:
gettext fails to install; package relationships should be with
Recently brought up on debian-devel@ [1].
Wine maintainers, your “Recommends: gettext” is most likely incorrect.
Please attend to this issue.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/10/msg00410.html
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1039685 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1039685
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1039685
package libapt-pkg4.12 0.8.16~exp12ubuntu10.3 failed to install/upgrade:
'./usr/share/locale/sk/LC_MESSAGES/libapt-pkg4.12.mo' is different from
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1039685 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1039685
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1039685
package libapt-pkg4.12 0.8.16~exp12ubuntu10.3 failed to install/upgrade:
'./usr/share/locale/sk/LC_MESSAGES/libapt-pkg4.12.mo' is different from
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1071565 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1071565
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1071565
delete button does not delete anything
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
Due to key bindings in cwidget, “delete” behaves the same as
“backspace.” This is fixed in cwidget/0.5.16-3.3 (quantal).
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #493320
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=493320
** Also affects: cwidget (Debian) via
cwidget (0.5.16-3.3) unstable; urgency=low
* Actually display translated strings: cherry-pick c65cae upstream, and use
libcwidget3 as domain name in src/cwidget/generic/util/i18n.h and
po/Makevars; install usr/share/locale files. (Closes: #559738)
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug
On 27 October 2012 00:28, mikhail-777 wpr.o...@gmail.com wrote:
But patch in the mail dialog is about 2010 year.
True. However it was only applied in June 2012, which is too late
to be included in Ubuntu 12.04.
I don't very believe in phrases like We believe that the bug you
reported is
sunyucong: you must enable the -proposed repository first. See the
instructions referred to in comment #28.
Restoring previous tags.
** Tags removed: verification-needed
** Tags added: verification-done
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Assignee: Abhishek kumar singh (abhishekkumarsingh-cse) = (unassigned)
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress = Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to the bug
This issue should have expired by now.
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete = Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/880277
Title:
aptitude always wants to
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Assignee: Abhishek kumar singh (abhishekkumarsingh-cse) = (unassigned)
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress = Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Assignee: Abhishek kumar singh (abhishekkumarsingh-cse) = (unassigned)
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress = New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
That is a lot of information. What do you claim the problem is? This:
1 not fully installed or removed.
or some other part?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1066557
Title:
I wonder if it didn't has been a collision with an apt-gect clean
launched 2 seconds before?
Very likely, this command could remove the just downloaded packages.
Which program did you use to try to install these packages? Apt-get,
software center, synaptic, …?
--
You received this bug
The chain of -dev and some other dependencies here is not all multi-
arch. Is there some reason why you need libsdl-ttf2.0-dev:i386 instead
of the amd64 package here?
Please attach the output of:
$ apt-get install -s -oDebug::pkgProblemResolver=1
-oDebug::pkgDepCache::Marker=1
** Package changed: aptitude (Ubuntu) = software-properties (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1065868
Title:
apt-add-repository is broken (cannot convert float NaN to integer)
On 12 October 2012 06:12, Edward 1065...@bugs.launchpad.net wrote:
Public bug reported:
Libreoffice won't install on my Dell Latitude D430 on Lucid Lynx. I
tried both by using the REPO and by downloading and compiling the
source.
No such package is in the official repository for Lucid.
On 12 October 2012 08:41, Daniel Hartwig mand...@gmail.com wrote:
No such package is in the official repository for Lucid. Provide your
sources.list.
And any files under /etc/apt/sources.list.d
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed
On 12 October 2012 06:12, Edward 1065...@bugs.launchpad.net wrote:
---
with source:
*
* Running LibreOffice build configuration.
*
This is a separate
There are conflicts with:
- gettext and gettext:i386
- gettext-base and gettext-base:i386
Please provide the output from apt/dpkg showing the actual error. Is it
the same error as bug #954029?
** Changed in: gettext (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Incomplete
--
You received this bug
** Also affects: wine1.4 (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/954029
Title:
package gettext 0.18.1.1-5ubuntu3 failed to
Almost all duplicates here have wine1.4 packages involved.
Binary packages wine1.4-i386 and wine1.4-amd64 both have “Recommends:
gettext”, which is Multi-Arch: allowed. As a result the system attempts
to install both gettext:i386 and gettext:amd64, which is not allowed.
The wine1.4 packages
install both gettext:i386 and gettext:amd64, which is not allowed. The
wine1.4 packages should *consider* whether they actually use the package
gettext …
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
At this point the issue is invalid for gettext. This actual cause is
other packages declaring inappropriate relationships with gettext. See
previous comment.
** Changed in: gettext (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 954029 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/954029
Please provide the output from apt/dpkg showing the actual error. Is it
the same error as bug #954029?
Never mind. That bug (and it's duplicates) all involve wine1.4
packages, so this is definitely a
At least one report here (bug #977078) features playonlinux which
depends on gettext-base. That report also contains the wine1.4 packages
which are problematic, though since playonlinux is arch: all and appears
to be using gettext-base for it's shell script support the dependency in
playonlinux
The following packages will be REMOVED:
alien debhelper gettext google-earth-stable intltool-debian
lsb-core po-debconf
All these packages eventually depend on gettext. Please see bug
#954029.
Directly depending packages: intltool-debian po-debconf. These are both
arch: all and should not
Structure of gettext packaging in Debian is currently being discussed
http://bugs.debian.org/683751, and it is likely this will no longer be
an issue for playonlinux.
The wine1.4 recommends still needs to be examined.
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #683751
** No longer affects: playonlinux (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/954029
Title:
gettext fails to install; package relationships should be with
gettext:any,
status:Invalid → Confirmed
Please do not confirm your own reports.
It is still apt's bug if it is unable to uninstall it.
No, it isn't. See bug #12508, for example, and
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-maintainerscripts.html.
The package maintainer scripts contain
301 - 400 of 732 matches
Mail list logo
