On Mon 20 Jul 2020 at 12:24:35 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote: > On Monday 20 July 2020 10:11:40 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Monday, July 20, 2020 06:58:10 AM Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > > "the latest candidate version" would be more accurate. If you think > > > this wording is an improvement feel free to file a wishlist bugs > > > against 'apt' (the package). > > > > Thanks -- I'll probably let that percolate in my head for a little > > while before I file a bug -- it's probably good wording, but there is > > no need to jump to a conclusion -- maybe we (collectively) will come > > up with something better or recognize this as the best choice. > > […] > > (I would like to help Gene with his problem, but I think you're giving > > the best advice on this atm. (I was trying to tell him that the > > problem package(s) that he is looking for is (are) those named in the > > apt-get install command, but don't think I was very clear.) > > What is upsetting me is that there is not, from the wording coming back > out of apt, any way to identify the package that needs (apparently) to > be downgraded, that starts this whole mess. Since this all seems to > start with the slic3r's --gui option, IMNSHO it should have been > something that apt should have solved for when I installed slic3r. But > apparently the author didn't list the Depends pulled in if the --gui > option was enabled.
If you only need libwx-perl to run the --gui option, then it wouldn't be appropriate to list it as a Depends, would it. At most, it would be a Recommends; perhaps just a Suggests. The packages that need downgrading are listed in your error message. Whether you *can* downgrade just those packages them with 171 backports on your system is another matter. (There might be second order dependencies, and then third order, etc.) > Change of subject, what do we have that can process and display a .step > file? Please. Etiquette. Cheers, David.
