FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 08-19-2011, 03:20 AM
Tom Roche
 
Default debugging package breakage

summary: I'm a new debian user with some package breakage. I'd appreciate

* assistance with my specific problem (i.e., give me a fish)
* general heuristics for debug package breakage (i.e., teach me to fish)

details: I'm a longtime ubuntu user who switched last week to

$ lsb_release -ds
Linux Mint Debian Edition
$ uname -rv
2.6.39-2-amd64 #1 SMP Tue Jul 5 02:51:22 UTC 2011

While I very much appreciate the better performance I'm getting on LMDE
(which is based on debian testing), I'm also appreciating the extent to
which ubuntu sheltered me from having to learn much about APT :-) So I'd
appreciate your assistance with debugging the following problem:

me@it:~$ aptitude search ?broken
> iB acl - Access control list utilities
> iB coreutils - GNU core utilities
> iB cups - Common UNIX Printing System(tm) - server
> iB libacl1-dev - Access control list static libraries and headers
> iB libarchive1 - Single library to read/write tar, cpio, pax, zip, iso9660, etc.
> iB libgnomevfs2-0 - GNOME Virtual File System (runtime libraries)
> iB libisofs6 - library to create ISO9660 images
> iB ntfs-3g - read-write NTFS driver for FUSE
> iB rsync - fast remote file copy program (like rcp)
> iB samba - SMB/CIFS file, print, and login server for Unix

for PACKAGE in $(aptitude -F "%p" search ?broken) ; do
for CMD in
"apt-cache policy ${PACKAGE}"
"aptitude why ${PACKAGE}"
; do
echo -e "${CMD}"
eval "${CMD}"
done
echo
done

> apt-cache policy acl
> acl:
> Installed: 2.2.51-3
> Candidate: 2.2.51-3
> Version table:
> *** 2.2.51-3 0
> 500 http://debian.linuxmint.com/latest/ testing/main amd64 Packages
> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
> aptitude why acl
> i libsane Depends acl (>= 2.2.49-4)

> apt-cache policy coreutils
> coreutils:
> Installed: 8.5-1
> Candidate: 8.5-1
> Version table:
> *** 8.5-1 0
> 500 http://debian.linuxmint.com/latest/ testing/main amd64 Packages
> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
> aptitude why coreutils
> i xinit Depends coreutils (>= 7.4-1)

> apt-cache policy cups
> cups:
> Installed: 1.4.6-9
> Candidate: 1.4.6-9
> Version table:
> *** 1.4.6-9 0
> 500 http://debian.linuxmint.com/latest/ testing/main amd64 Packages
> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
> aptitude why cups
> i cups-driver-gutenprint Depends cups (>= 1.3.0)

> apt-cache policy libacl1-dev
> libacl1-dev:
> Installed: 2.2.51-3
> Candidate: 2.2.51-3
> Version table:
> *** 2.2.51-3 0
> 500 http://debian.linuxmint.com/latest/ testing/main amd64 Packages
> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
> aptitude why libacl1-dev
> Unable to find a reason to install libacl1-dev.

> apt-cache policy libarchive1
> libarchive1:
> Installed: 2.8.4-1
> Candidate: 2.8.4-1
> Version table:
> *** 2.8.4-1 0
> 500 http://debian.linuxmint.com/latest/ testing/main amd64 Packages
> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
> aptitude why libarchive1
> i libtotem-plparser17 Depends libarchive1 (>= 2.0.25)

> apt-cache policy libgnomevfs2-0
> libgnomevfs2-0:
> Installed: 1:2.24.4-1
> Candidate: 1:2.24.4-1
> Version table:
> *** 1:2.24.4-1 0
> 500 http://debian.linuxmint.com/latest/ testing/main amd64 Packages
> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
> aptitude why libgnomevfs2-0
> i lock-keys-applet Depends libgnomevfs2-0 (>= 1:2.17.90)

> apt-cache policy libisofs6
> libisofs6:
> Installed: 1.1.2-1
> Candidate: 1.1.2-1
> Version table:
> *** 1.1.2-1 0
> 500 http://debian.linuxmint.com/latest/ testing/main amd64 Packages
> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
> aptitude why libisofs6
> i libbrasero-media0 Depends libisofs6 (>= 0.6.14)

> apt-cache policy ntfs-3g
> ntfs-3g:
> Installed: 1:2011.1.15AR.4+2011.4.12-2
> Candidate: 1:2011.1.15AR.4+2011.4.12-2
> Version table:
> *** 1:2011.1.15AR.4+2011.4.12-2 0
> 500 http://debian.linuxmint.com/latest/ testing/main amd64 Packages
> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
> aptitude why ntfs-3g
> i udisks Recommends ntfs-3g

> apt-cache policy rsync
> rsync:
> Installed: 3.0.8-1
> Candidate: 3.0.8-1
> Version table:
> *** 3.0.8-1 0
> 500 http://debian.linuxmint.com/latest/ testing/main amd64 Packages
> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
> aptitude why rsync
> i live-tools Suggests rsync

> apt-cache policy samba
> samba:
> Installed: 2:3.5.8~dfsg-5
> Candidate: 2:3.5.8~dfsg-5
> Version table:
> *** 2:3.5.8~dfsg-5 0
> 500 http://debian.linuxmint.com/latest/ testing/main amd64 Packages
> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
> aptitude why samba
> i nautilus-share Suggests samba (>= 3.0.27a)

These all seem like things I'd want--definitely samba (gotta cope with
M$), rsync (my backup scripts use), libgnomevfs2-0 (I want
lock-keys-applet, or something with same function), cups (gotta print),
coreutils (who wouldn't want that?). libacl1-dev I only want because it
helped me solve an install problem (details here

http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?f=141&t=79619&p=462540#p462488

). So I did

for PACKAGE in $(aptitude -F "%p" search ?broken) ; do
for CMD in
"sudo aptitude install -f ${PACKAGE}"
; do
echo -e "${CMD}"
eval "${CMD}"
done
echo
done

but that just repeats

> No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed.

So I'm confused. Why does `aptitude` think these packages are broken? If
it's wrong (i.e., the packages are not broken), how do I correct its
misperception? If it's correct, how do I fix the packages, if `aptitude`
won't force install?

Feel free to forward or to point me to FM to RT,
and TIA, Tom Roche <Tom_Roche@pobox.com>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87d3g2xf1w.fsf@pobox.com">http://lists.debian.org/87d3g2xf1w.fsf@pobox.com
 
Old 08-19-2011, 04:28 AM
Scott Ferguson
 
Default debugging package breakage

On 19/08/11 13:20, Tom Roche wrote:
>
> summary: I'm a new debian user

Not yet you're not - confused?
You are still using Ubuntu.

Debian makes potatoes.
Ubuntu mashes the Debian potatoes, dries them, adds stuff, and
repackages - to make a variety of potato based products.
Mint uses Ubuntu instant potato mix as a basis for a vegetable based meal.

Apparently the instructions on the side of the packages made by Ubuntu
and Mint aren't very good - so people come here asking about potatoes....

> with some package breakage. I'd appreciate
>
> * assistance with my specific problem (i.e., give me a fish)
> * general heuristics for debug package breakage (i.e., teach me to fish)
>
> details: I'm a longtime ubuntu user who switched last week to
>
> $ lsb_release -ds
> Linux Mint Debian Edition
> $ uname -rv
> 2.6.39-2-amd64 #1 SMP Tue Jul 5 02:51:22 UTC 2011
>
> While I very much appreciate the better performance I'm getting on LMDE
> (which is based on debian testing), I'm also appreciating the extent to
> which ubuntu sheltered me from having to learn much about APT :-) So I'd
> appreciate your assistance with debugging the following problem:


The best way to learn apt is to use it :-)
Aptitude != apt.

>
> me@it:~$ aptitude search ?broken
>> iB acl - Access control list utilities
>> iB coreutils - GNU core utilities
>> iB cups - Common UNIX Printing System(tm) - server
>> iB libacl1-dev - Access control list static libraries and headers
>> iB libarchive1 - Single library to read/write tar, cpio, pax, zip, iso9660, etc.
>> iB libgnomevfs2-0 - GNOME Virtual File System (runtime libraries)
>> iB libisofs6 - library to create ISO9660 images
>> iB ntfs-3g - read-write NTFS driver for FUSE
>> iB rsync - fast remote file copy program (like rcp)
>> iB samba - SMB/CIFS file, print, and login server for Unix
>

<snipped>

>
> So I'm confused. Why does `aptitude` think these packages are broken? If
> it's wrong (i.e., the packages are not broken), how do I correct its
> misperception? If it's correct, how do I fix the packages, if `aptitude`
> won't force install?
>
> Feel free to forward or to point me to FM to RT,

But we have Really Fine Manuals here.... ;-p

> and TIA, Tom Roche <Tom_Roche@pobox.com>
>
>

Mint != Debian, so you will get more relevant answers asking on Mint
forums. Regardless of how helpful Debian users wish to be, we have
little information on how Mint changes things - only that they do. In
most cases your problems will be specific to Mint, and only confusing to
Debian. I appreciate that Mint is regarded as Debian's red-headed step
son - but even if someone here can help - it won't help the Mint community.

I understand that you're trying to illustrate what you think is not
working (ie. shown by Aptitude as broken.... but what is it that *is
not* working?

Are any of repositories that you use Debian repositories?
NOTE: Debian style is not Debian.

What does:-
# apt-get update; apt-get -sf install
output?

When you've tried that (and noted the results), what does:-
# apt-get -s install rsync
output?

Please paste both outputs to your post (with the other answers).


Cheers

--
"I love the Pope, I love seeing him in his Pope-Mobile, his three feet
of bullet proof plexi-glass. That's faith in action folks! You know he's
got God on his side."
~ Bill Hicks


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4E4DE67C.6020906@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4E4DE67C.6020906@gmail.com
 
Old 08-19-2011, 06:00 AM
Marc Shapiro
 
Default debugging package breakage

On 08/18/11 21:28, Scott Ferguson wrote:

On 19/08/11 13:20, Tom Roche wrote:


summary: I'm a new debian user


Not yet you're not - confused?
You are still using Ubuntu.

Debian makes potatoes.
Ubuntu mashes the Debian potatoes, dries them, adds stuff, and
repackages - to make a variety of potato based products.
Mint uses Ubuntu instant potato mix as a basis for a vegetable based meal.


Actually, I just checked the Linux Mint pages. Apparently Linux Mint
Debian Edition is based directly on Testing, with a rolling release.
They also have their regular version which is based on Ubuntu with
discrete releases.


So LMDE does not use Ubuntu's 'instant potato mix', but it does mash its
own. They *claim* to be 100% compatible with Debian and NOT compatible
with Ubuntu.


Tom, where is your /etc/apt/sources.list is pointing to? Is it pointing
to a Mint repository? Could it be pointing to their standard Ubuntu
based repository? That would almost certainly cause breakage. If it is
pointing to Debian repositories LMDE may not be as 100% compatible as
they say.


--
Marc Shapiro


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4E4DFC08.7060802@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4E4DFC08.7060802@gmail.com
 
Old 08-19-2011, 06:53 AM
Scott Ferguson
 
Default debugging package breakage

On 19/08/11 16:00, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> On 08/18/11 21:28, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>> On 19/08/11 13:20, Tom Roche wrote:
>>>
<snipped>
>
> Actually, I just checked the Linux Mint pages. Apparently Linux Mint
> Debian Edition is based directly on Testing, with a rolling release.

LMDE = Gnome and XFCE

> They also have their regular version which is based on Ubuntu with
> discrete releases.

KDE and Gnome.

>
> So LMDE does not use Ubuntu's 'instant potato mix', but it does mash its
> own. They *claim* to be 100% compatible with Debian and NOT compatible
> with Ubuntu.

Not 100% compatible - if it was it'd just be themes and images, and
wouldn't replace Debian packages with it's own substitutes (not simple
repackages).

Mint = Testing + Mintify.
Mintify = Ubuntu + other

Aside from the nonfree binary blobs, Mint incorporates a lot of non-free
software. It also includes packages you will never see in Debian (main
menu, backup tools, software portal, update manager, software portal)
bound together with lots of python.

>
> Tom, where is your /etc/apt/sources.list is pointing to? Is it pointing
> to a Mint repository? Could it be pointing to their standard Ubuntu
> based repository? That would almost certainly cause breakage. If it is
> pointing to Debian repositories LMDE may not be as 100% compatible as
> they say.
>

Apart from the differences - what Mint has in common with Debian is that
testing tends to break, and requires care to modify (and fix).

Cheers


--
"I love the Pope, I love seeing him in his Pope-Mobile, his three feet
of bullet proof plexi-glass. That's faith in action folks! You know he's
got God on his side."
~ Bill Hicks


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4E4E0860.9040108@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4E4E0860.9040108@gmail.com
 
Old 08-19-2011, 09:27 AM
Darac Marjal
 
Default debugging package breakage

On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 11:20:43PM -0400, Tom Roche wrote:
>
> summary: I'm a new debian user with some package breakage. I'd appreciate
>
> * assistance with my specific problem (i.e., give me a fish)
> * general heuristics for debug package breakage (i.e., teach me to fish)
>
[cut]
>
> So I'm confused. Why does `aptitude` think these packages are broken? If
> it's wrong (i.e., the packages are not broken), how do I correct its
> misperception? If it's correct, how do I fix the packages, if `aptitude`
> won't force install?

The main reason you've got package breakage is usually because upgrading
them would conflict with some other package you have. Speaking purely
from a personal perspective here, I've learned to get along very well
with the curses interface to aptitude.

Start by running "aptitude" as root (i.e. by su to root or by sudo as is
your wont). There'll be a few seconds while aptitude does some
calculations, then you get a "graphical" interface. At the top is a
blue menu, next is a tree view of all the packages known to the system,
another blue bar then heads a description pane and at the bottom is the
status bar. Likely, in your situation the status bar is red. You will
also see, at the top of the screen something like "Broken: #N"

What we now do is press 'e' to 'E'xamine aptitude's suggestions on how
to resolve these breakages. Aptitude will present you with a list of
packages sorted by what it plans to do with them. For example, you'll
get "Remove the following packages:", "Keep the following packages at
their current version:" and so on.

You now have two options to pick a suitable resolution. The simple
method is to use the '.' and ',' (mnemonic, they're the '>' and '<'
keys, usually, but without shift) to cycle through aptitude's solutions
until you find one that's suitable to you. Pay attention to each
solution as it's presented as there may be some solutions you'd not
thought of: the simplest solution is to hold every broken package back
and hope that an update will fix it in a few days (happens a lot in
unstable), or you may find that a package has been replaced by another
of similar functionality (for example dhcp-client and isc-dhcp-client)
or, if you have a particularly complicated set of sources, you may even
have to downgrade a package to achieve solution.

The more advanced method is to guide aptitude's resolver. Each time
aptitude presents you with a solution, "vote" on whether you approve of
or reject the solution for individual packages. For example, you say you
want samba, so if aptitude wants to remove the samba package, scroll
down to it and press 'r' to reject that suggestion. If aptitude wants
to, say, upgrade a package but you don't like the whole of the solution,
press 'a' on that package to approve it. Use this sparingly; although
you're guiding aptitude, you're also restricting it.

Finally, when you get to a solution you're happy with, press '!" to
apply the solution. You'll be take back to the package list and,
hopefully, the "Broken: #N" message should be gone. Press 'g' to get a
preview of the changes to be made and finally 'g' to actually
download/install the packages.

>
> Feel free to forward or to point me to FM to RT,
> and TIA, Tom Roche <Tom_Roche@pobox.com>
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87d3g2xf1w.fsf@pobox.com
>

--
Darac Marjal
 
Old 08-21-2011, 03:48 PM
Tom Roche
 
Default debugging package breakage

summary: my questions are about

+ using Debian packaging and its tools (notably apt-*, aptitude)
+ fixing problems with same

*not*

- fixing broken functionality
- LMDE
- LMDE repositories

If there is a better place to ask end-user-level questions about Debian
packaging and its tools (vs dev- or builder-level), please point me to
it. Meanwhile, I'm interested in ways to make `aptitude` see as unbroken
packages that appear (notably, to `apt-get`) to be in fact unbroken. One
such way is proposed below (purging and re-installing `aptitude`), but
it appears problematic (more below).

details:

First, thanks to Darac Marjal for his detailed explanation of how to use
the ncurses-based `aptitude` TUI to fix the following:

original post @
http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2011/08/msg01104.html
Tom Roche Thu, 18 Aug 2011 23:20:43 -0400
> me@it:~$ aptitude search ?broken
> > iB acl - Access control list utilities
> > iB coreutils - GNU core utilities
> > iB cups - Common UNIX Printing System(tm) - server
> > iB libacl1-dev - Access control list static libraries and headers
> > iB libarchive1 - Single library to read/write tar, cpio, pax, zip, iso9660, etc.
> > iB libgnomevfs2-0 - GNOME Virtual File System (runtime libraries)
> > iB libisofs6 - library to create ISO9660 images
> > iB ntfs-3g - read-write NTFS driver for FUSE
> > iB rsync - fast remote file copy program (like rcp)
> > iB samba - SMB/CIFS file, print, and login server for Unix

However, given the 5 facts below, ISTM the problem is with `aptitude`,
not the packages.

Scott Ferguson Fri, 19 Aug 2011 14:28:44 +1000
>> I understand that you're trying to illustrate what you think is not
>> working (ie. shown by Aptitude as broken.... but what is it that *is
>> not* working?

*Aptitude* appears (to me--ICBW) to be not working properly, based on
the following 5 facts:

F1 My LMDE box is not broken functionally (aside from last.fm audio,
which I'm assuming is unrelated to the above): only some packages
are, and only in aptitude (more on that below). Specifically, none of
the functionality that I would expect to be broken from the above
appears to be broken. Not that I've done exhaustive testing, but
certainly all the coreutils that I've used appear to work.

F2 I appreciate that, at some fundamental level, LMDE != Debian. However,

Marc Shapiro Thu, 18 Aug 2011 23:00:40 -0700
> Linux Mint Debian Edition is based directly on Testing, with a rolling
> release. [LMDE is *not* the same as Mint's] regular version which is
> based on Ubuntu with discrete releases. So LMDE does not use Ubuntu's
> 'instant potato mix', but it does mash its own. They *claim* to be
> 100% compatible with Debian and NOT compatible with Ubuntu.

See also

http://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=1527

(but note that LMDE 64-bit, which I'm using, has arrived since then).
In order of increasing Debianosity, Ubuntu < LMDE < Debian.

F3 LMDE has its own repositories.

> where is your /etc/apt/sources.list is pointing to?

me@it:~$ sudo cat /etc/apt/sources.list
> deb http://packages.linuxmint.com/ debian main upstream import
> deb http://debian.linuxmint.com/latest testing main contrib non-free
> deb http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates main contrib non-free
> deb http://www.debian-multimedia.org testing main non-free

> If it is pointing to Debian repositories LMDE may not be as 100%
> compatible as they say.

That's entirely possible, and if my package-breakage problem appears
to be due to problems with one or more of these repositories I will
certainly raise that issue with the LMDE folks. However, at this
point, the problem appears to be limited to my `aptitude`:

* There is no functional correlate to the aptitude package breakage
(see fact 1).

* The packages appear OK in `apt-get` (see next fact).

F4 My `apt-get` shows no breakage, but my `aptitude` does:

me@it:~$ sudo apt-get check | wc -l
> 3
me@it:~$ sudo apt-get check
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree
> Reading state information... Done
me@it:~$ aptitude search ?broken
> iB acl - Access control list utilities
> iB coreutils - GNU core utilities
> iB cups - Common UNIX Printing System(tm) - server
> iB libacl1-dev - Access control list static libraries and headers
> iB libarchive1 - Single library to read/write tar, cpio, pax, zip, iso9660, etc.
> iB libgnomevfs2-0 - GNOME Virtual File System (runtime libraries)
> iB libisofs6 - library to create ISO9660 images
> iB ntfs-3g - read-write NTFS driver for FUSE
> iB rsync - fast remote file copy program (like rcp)
> iB samba - SMB/CIFS file, print, and login server for Unix

F5 While setting up this box, I first used `apt-get` then `aptitude`.
FWIW I've been doing this since I started using Ubuntu (few years/
releases), based on my reading of

http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch02.en.html#_literal_apt_get_literal_literal_apt_ cache_literal_vs_literal_aptitude_literal
> The apt-get and apt-cache commands are the most basic package management tool.

...

> * apt-get is most suitable for the major system upgrade between releases, etc.

...

> The aptitude command is the most versatile package management tool.

> * aptitude offers the fullscreen interactive text user interface.

> * aptitude offers the commandline user interface, too.

> * aptitude is most suitable for the daily interactive package
> management such as inspecting installed packages and searching
> available packages.

So what I do is

* Immediately before install, copy my sources.list and sources.list.d/
to some ${PACKAGE_BACKUP_DIR}, and
`dpkg --get-selections > ${PACKAGE_BACKUP_FILE}`
(in that dir).

* Immediately after install, use apt-get for the initial `update` and
`dist-upgrade`.

* Try to restore my previous packages with (while sudo)

dpkg --set-selections < ${PACKAGE_BACKUP_FILE}
apt-get install -y dselect
dselect update
apt-get dselect-upgrade

After that's cleaned up,

* `aptitude update`

* Until the next upgrade (using LMDE, I'm hoping will be awhile :-) "for
the daily interactive package management," I use aptitude.

This approach has worked well for me ... until, I suspect, now.

>From those 5 facts, I'm drawing 2 conclusions:

C1 My `aptitude` db is corrupt, while my `apt-get` db is not. This seems
pretty clear from F4, no?

C2 This was caused by my using `aptitude` and `apt-get` "together." I'm
less sure of this conclusion, since I've used the approach detailed
in F5 several times without difficulty. However, I've read in several
places that one should not use `aptitude` and `apt-get` together.

Am I missing something? If not, my main question is,

Q1 How to fix my `aptitude`? Because I still prefer to use it for "daily
interactive package management."

My initial impulse was

Q2 Can I fix it by purging and re-installing `aptitude`? I'm guessing
that would remove its currently-bad database and re-generate it. Am I
missing something?

Presuming Q2 is correct (and feel free to deny that, and to propose
better alternatives), and presuming one doesn't want to try that with
`aptitude` itself, I tried

me@it:~$ sudo apt-get -s purge aptitude
...
> The following packages will be REMOVED:
> aptitude* mintsystem* tasksel* tasksel-data* wajig*
> 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 5 to remove and 1 not upgraded.
> Purg wajig [2.2]
> Purg tasksel [2.89] [tasksel-data:amd64 ]
> Purg tasksel-data [2.89]
> Purg mintsystem [7.7.9]
> Purg aptitude [0.6.3-4]
me@it:~$ aptitude -F "%p" search "?depends(aptitude)"
> aptitude-dbg
> aptitude-gtk
> mintsystem
> pkgsync
> tasksel
> wajig

raises a third question:

Q3 How to purge and re-install only `aptitude`?

TIA, Tom Roche <Tom_Roche@pobox.com>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87r54e7olk.fsf@pobox.com">http://lists.debian.org/87r54e7olk.fsf@pobox.com
 
Old 08-21-2011, 06:16 PM
Lisi
 
Default debugging package breakage

On Sunday 21 August 2011 16:48:07 Tom Roche wrote:
> me@it:~$ sudo cat /etc/apt/sources.list
>
> > deb http://packages.linuxmint.com/ debian main upstream import
> > deb http://debian.linuxmint.com/latest testing main contrib non-free
> > deb http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates main contrib non-free
> > deb http://www.debian-multimedia.org testing main non-free

Why did you use sudo? It is not necessary for this command, and it is
generally considered better to act as root only when strictly necessary - as
it would be, e.g., to edit your sources list.

Lisi


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 201108211916.13662.lisi.reisz@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/201108211916.13662.lisi.reisz@gmail.com
 
Old 08-21-2011, 06:38 PM
Tom Roche
 
Default debugging package breakage

Tom Roche Sunday 21 August 2011 16:48:07
> me@it:~$ sudo cat /etc/apt/sources.list
> > deb http://packages.linuxmint.com/ debian main upstream import
> > deb http://debian.linuxmint.com/latest testing main contrib non-free
> > deb http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates main contrib non-free
> > deb http://www.debian-multimedia.org testing main non-free

Lisi Reisz Sun, 21 Aug 2011 19:16:13 +0100
> Why did you use sudo?

velocity(fingers) > velocity(brain)

> It is not necessary for this command

... but so what? it's `cat` ...


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87obzi7gph.fsf@pobox.com">http://lists.debian.org/87obzi7gph.fsf@pobox.com
 
Old 08-21-2011, 07:07 PM
Lisi
 
Default debugging package breakage

On Sunday 21 August 2011 19:38:34 Tom Roche wrote:
> ... but so what? it's `cat` ...

yes - but why open root up when you don't need it??


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 201108212007.41756.lisi.reisz@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/201108212007.41756.lisi.reisz@gmail.com
 
Old 08-22-2011, 02:45 AM
Scott Ferguson
 
Default debugging package breakage

On 22/08/11 01:48, Tom Roche wrote:
>
> summary: my questions are about
>
> + using Debian packaging and its tools (notably apt-*, aptitude)
> + fixing problems with same
>
> *not*
>
> - fixing broken functionality
> - LMDE
> - LMDE repositories
>
> If there is a better place to ask end-user-level questions about Debian
> packaging and its tools (vs dev- or builder-level), please point me to
> it.

As has been pointed out before - you are asking questions about Mint.
Not Debian:-
http://www.debian.org/doc/FAQ/ch-choosing.en.html#s3.2.2

Regardless of the claims made by Mint developers - Mint is not Debian:-
http://www.debian.org/doc/FAQ/ch-choosing.en.html#s3.2

Though Mint developers claim Mint is "100% compatible with Debian
Testing and Stable" - Debian isn't 100% compatible with Testing AND Stable".

> Meanwhile, I'm interested in ways to make `aptitude` see as unbroken
> packages that appear (notably, to `apt-get`) to be in fact unbroken. One
> such way is proposed below (purging and re-installing `aptitude`), but
> it appears problematic (more below).

Despite being unable to do a task, you insist you know what the problem
is and how to fix it.

But then you mix stable and testing without pinning....

<snipped>
> Scott Ferguson Fri, 19 Aug 2011 14:28:44 +1000
>>> I understand that you're trying to illustrate *what* you think is not
>>> working (ie. shown by Aptitude as broken.... but *what* is it that *is
>>> not* working?
>
> *Aptitude* appears (to me--ICBW) to be not working properly, based on
> the following 5 facts:

<snipped because it's not relevant>


I asked for the output of apt-get -sf install and apt-get -s install rsync.


>
> TIA, Tom Roche <Tom_Roche@pobox.com>
>
>

Cheers

--
"Music is a great energizer. It's a language everybody knows."
~ Bill Hicks


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4E51C2B0.3040707@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4E51C2B0.3040707@gmail.com
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:27 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org