-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 10/01/2014 at 10:15 AM, Rusi Mody wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 1, 2014 11:40:03 AM UTC+5:30, Don Armstrong > wrote: > >> On Tue, 30 Sep 2014, Rusi Mody wrote: >> >>> Yeah one more systemd thread [Not a rant!] I am getting that >>> systemd-shim is to be removed. Is this expected? > >> It looks like you are trying to install systemd-shim amd64 and >> systemd-shim i386 at the same time, but it's not totally clear. No - that's just the result of 'aptitude why-not' trying to find a conflicting-dependencies path. As far as I can tell, the algorithm used for that hasn't been properly modified to correctly account for some of the ramifications of multiarch; as a result, this sort of "self-conflict" from cross-arch versions of a single package crops up all the time in the "dependency chains" aptitude finds with that command. >> What's the complete output of the command that you're trying to >> run and the output of apt-cache policy foopkg; for the affected >> packages? > > I'll try and answer your specific questions as I understand them. > What is the (set of) affected packages I dont really know so... > > The command I am running is aptitude dist-upgrade and its output is > below. > > However I have a more basic question. Do I need systemd-shim? Given > 1. Currently I am running systemd as pid-1 No. If you have systemd as PID 1, systemd-shim is redundant... > 2. If needed I can start sysv with grub-line > init=/lib/sysvinit/init ...although without it, you will have some missing functionality if you ever do this. > [At least it was working a few weeks ago and I see the file is > still there :-) ] > > > ------------------------ Output of aptitude dist-upgrade: > The following packages have unmet dependencies: > systemd-shim : Breaks: systemd (< 209) but 208-8 is installed. This is because a new version of systemd-shim made it into the archive (or at least specifically the section of the archive you're using - I imagine it's testing), but the corresponding required version of systemd hasn't made it into the (same section of the) archive yet. In that situation, you have three options: * Postpone upgrading until the matching new version of systemd is available. (You can probably still upgrade the rest of your system with judicious use of package pinning, but that's beyond the scope of this mail.) * Remove systemd. * Remove systemd-shim. Given what you've said above, I suspect removing systemd-shim will be the right choice in your case. - -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJULB2dAAoJEASpNY00KDJrGPsP/R/T7FX9mk2twPhrykKNxmXB s7oKy3sZrUp2HTUxyEvQclNEaeCCyLzWl+1yTPbRjYyv/V90oXFYVkqFf9Tfkyj6 fpFnHOi0f/51FdjMEDAniBKreYDHuSxfZ9q3Ea9CjCSodEFxmSO9KOAsDfKE8KDt YascRQs2SCefsrYAIgQs/XLhbLYRetgllDU+fglojHO39DlDsc69cSIr8EJsnOnc 0M45nolAGoxWOcwjHXH0NyHoUaIfVmCFRBxY2gN6bhxpNwx1OpJ2yRwwH4IAzu1c 35mWIVnTo3NkvAzcxqmkmFVEIfT6iQ934XkkMngdt9Qui1hwd9MlDgezx+6ozblZ bb+ZUyFcrSPWs1Jcg+HW1y9YkY8olackTf3iD/Vq4sgzCfXFeA71m3Ub+aYt5USR pdguvrICsy01Pvh8FW9kuTUIusmunOKNwVZvj5H4UG3LI9ZDBU37ZzlE5VXC/msu 7JY11oQftiGwFWyhqw3LrnmKbkeDf9iRuDNgBnH7zhuFjLtOMZEB/Z1+f8ymwUXs ZzABQCnHUnc2LLkOXGaM2TVCMJWR1s3e5dVusOJ6VOEPl4QKfN2SXtgVPxlQbgn/ UGm1IljeWOE1Y5myMUiHmTgSPgTxhZ9VxoX1/LDfya5QXLTAjg3GRcvpmxG5AytJ 8E4Jat6EbYyNn2M82+Dp =pf8b -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/542c1d9d.7070...@fastmail.fm
