On Saturday 24 September 2005 16:49, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le samedi 24 septembre 2005 à 16:03 +0300, matt a écrit : > > Package: libgnome2-common > > Version: 2.10.1-1 > > Severity: grave > > Justification: renders package unusable > > > > *** Please type your report below this line *** > > > > # apt-get -f install > > > > Reading package lists... Done > > Building dependency tree... Done > > 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 399 not upgraded. > > 2 not fully installed or removed. > > Need to get 0B of archives. > > After unpacking 0B of additional disk space will be used. > > Setting up libgnome2-common (2.10.1-1) ... > > No such file `/usr/lib/GConf/2/libgconfbackend-xml.so' > > Did you upgrade gconf2 in the same run?
Booted system up this morning, with gconfd 2.10.1, then later on upgraded gnome based files as a bunch, with kde did the same thing, first upgraded auxiliary things not related to kde, then big amount of kde core components at the same time, had previously trouble with partial upgrades, so tried to upgrade as much as possible which are related to each other. With kde everything worked, with gnome no. From boot: Sep 24 09:46:39 localhost gconfd (tampio-2886): starting (version 2.10.1), pid 2886 user 'tampio' Sep 24 09:46:40 localhost gconfd (tampio-2886): Resolved address "xml:readonly:/etc/gconf/gconf.xml.mandatory" to a read-only configuration source at position 0 So big bunch of gnome files were updated simultaneously. > Was a gconfd-2 process owned by > root still running? If you kill it, does the upgrade work? Probably, didn't look at the processes at that time. Nope, it is not running anymore and install won't work. As before Sarge, I'll try to fork dpkg's package list with force commands, then by hand. Seems that the list is not possible to get into working order by normal means, but as soon as I get that latest version changed to working one, I'll try another install and watch processes at that time. > > > // Copied /usr/lib/GConf/1 directory as /2 > > Why do people keep doing such stupid things? Because couple of days ago, for another package, I fixed same kind of problem with same type of action. After I get this dpkg problem fixed and old versions running, I'll remove that directory, will see if upgrade works any better. Yep, this time I'll try to update them one after another.
