On Ma, 27 oct 20, 13:03:32, David Wright wrote:
> On Tue 27 Oct 2020 at 15:05:36 (+0200), Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > On Lu, 26 oct 20, 09:55:00, John Hasler wrote:
> >
> > I believe someone demonstrated quite recently on list that dpkg has some
> > limits in the number and/or combination of packag
On Tue 27 Oct 2020 at 15:05:36 (+0200), Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Lu, 26 oct 20, 09:55:00, John Hasler wrote:
> > Andrei writes:
> > > dpkg does its own dependency checking, in addition to APT (the
> > > software, not the command), and will prevent any inconsistencies
> > > unless you use one of t
On Lu, 26 oct 20, 09:55:00, John Hasler wrote:
> Andrei writes:
> > dpkg does its own dependency checking, in addition to APT (the
> > software, not the command), and will prevent any inconsistencies
> > unless you use one of the --force switches.
>
> What it does not do is resolve dependencies.
So, if you don't pin down the priority of deb-multimedia, virtually every
audio- and video-related package on your system will be replaced with the
deb-multimedia version, which for the sake of stability is very likely a
bad idea.
So it is safer to lower the priority of deb-multimedia and that of
Hi,
On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 11:58:18 -0500
"R. Ramesh" wrote:
(...)
> I have these exact lines in my sources.list also. I thought we have
> backports so that we can get the newer version of packages. For
> example, buster multimedia has mythtv 0.30 and backports has mythtv
> 0.31 (the last time I
To resolve this, you might consider to create a file
like e.g. /etc/apt/preferences.d/multimedia .
Here the content of that file looks like:
Package: *
Pin: release o=Unofficial Multimedia Packages,n=buster
Pin-Priority: 332
Package: *
Pin: release o=Unofficial Multimedia Packages,n=buster-back
Andrei writes:
> dpkg does its own dependency checking, in addition to APT (the
> software, not the command), and will prevent any inconsistencies
> unless you use one of the --force switches.
What it does not do is resolve dependencies. Apt recursively resolves
dependencies, installing them as r
On Du, 25 oct 20, 21:00:03, Joe wrote:
>
> Synaptic, the GUI tool, is a front end to apt-get. All the apt tools
> are a front end to dpkg, which does all the work but does no dependency
> checking and is therefore not safe to be used directly.
dpkg does its own dependency checking, in addition to
Hi,
On Sun, 25 Oct 2020 17:53:16 -0500
"R. Ramesh" wrote:
(...)
> Nothing fancy. Installed debian 10 from USB and added multi-media and
> installed mythfrontend. That is all I have done.
> This is a NUC Pentium (N3700) box and not fancy at all. Here is my
> kernel
(...)
> My apt-get/aptitud
To begin with, which distribution is it? In general, with Stable, it
pretty much doesn't matter which tool is used. The kind of problems you
have indicate Unstable or Testing.
First, apt is pretty much apt-get, with different syntax and a few
extra features. Aptitude can generally do a better job
On Sun, 25 Oct 2020 12:12:19 -0500
Ram Ramesh wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to upgrade the current setup and I am unable to
> understand the differences between aptitude vs. apt-get usage.
> When I do apt-get -s upgrade, I get
> > myth2 [rramesh] 100 > sudo apt-get -s upgrade
> > Reading pack
It may be due to dbus request for packagekit. From 'apt-config dump |
grep 'DPkg::Post-Invoke':
<* snip *>
DPkg::Post-Invoke:: "/usr/bin/test
-e /usr/share/dbus-1/system-services/org.freedesktop.PackageKit.service
&& /usr/bin/test -S /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket && /usr/bin/gdbus
call --system
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 10:49:40AM -0400, songbird wrote:
> Guo Yixuan wrote:
>
> if this is not a typo on your part then
> this could be a problem elsewhere:
>
> "tassksel-data" is not a package, but "tasksel-data" is...
>
> > Searching "Timeout was reached" in aptitude's source code doesn'
Guo Yixuan wrote:
>Hendrik Boom wrote:
>> I just did a routine
>>
>> aptitude safe-upgrade
>>
>> from the root command-line on an 1386 Debian testing system. Here are
>> the past few lines in its output. Is this anything to worry about? Or
>> just an unimportant problem that will fix itself in
On 04/10/2012 12:52 AM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
I just did a routine
aptitude safe-upgrade
from the root command-line on an 1386 Debian testing system. Here are
the past few lines in its output. Is this anything to worry about? Or
just an unimportant problem that will fix itself in some future
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:22 +1100, Charlie wrote:
>
> Have never seen this previously with and just
> wondered what was going on? Using 100%of CPU?
>
> Current status: 44 updates [+44], 2054 new [+252].
> There are 10 newly obsolete packages: libebml0, libgs8, libmatroska0,
> librasqal2, libwp
JF Pirl wrote:
8<
> By the way, is the graphical ugliness of some days ago in Sid solved
> now? (when logging in, GTK/the gnome-panels seemed to be broken or
> something, and some panel applets did not want to work, as well as no
> direct shutdown possibilities in the gdm session - I swit
Hello,
You might as well do a simple
aptitude install epiphany-browser
(if my memory doesn't fail, it will warn you about the fact that
epiphany-gecko - and possibly epiphany-extensions-more - will have to
be removed, which is no problem as they are now obsolete).
By the way, is the graphical ugl
Rick Thomas wrote:
Thanks for the suggestion...
But I think there's something I don't understand...
From the package descriptions, it sounds like the epiphany folks are
headed in the direction of epiphany-browser and away from
epiphany-webkit. Wouldn't installing epiphany-webkit be a step b
On Oct 8, 2009, at 3:15 PM, Tomek Kruszona wrote:
Rick Thomas wrote:
The following packages are BROKEN:
epiphany-browser epiphany-extensions-more libgnokii4 python-qt4
Hello!
Regarding epiphany:
It seems has something in common with epiphany gecko to webkit
transition. Try installing epi
Rick Thomas wrote:
The following packages are BROKEN:
epiphany-browser epiphany-extensions-more libgnokii4 python-qt4
Hello!
Regarding epiphany:
It seems has something in common with epiphany gecko to webkit
transition. Try installing epiphany-webkit. It should remove obsolete
packages and
On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 06:59:27AM +0200, Sven Joachim was
heard to say:
> On 2009-04-08 04:40 +0200, Daniel Burrows wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 08:23:55AM +0200, Sven Joachim
> > was heard to say:
> >>
> >> But not the transition to kde4, since right now I cannot upgrade
> >> anythi
On 2009-04-08 04:40 +0200, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 08:23:55AM +0200, Sven Joachim was
> heard to say:
>>
>> But not the transition to kde4, since right now I cannot upgrade
>> anything:
>
> BTW, I have learned that if you pass "-o aptitude::delete-unused=false"
> as an
On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 08:23:55AM +0200, Sven Joachim was
heard to say:
> On 2009-04-06 08:59 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
>
> > On a side note, I never use the full-upgrade command because it has the
> > potential to remove a huge number of packages, and safe-upgrade handles
> > most situations
On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 08:23:55AM +0200, Sven Joachim was
heard to say:
> On 2009-04-06 08:59 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
>
> > On a side note, I never use the full-upgrade command because it has the
> > potential to remove a huge number of packages, and safe-upgrade handles
> > most situations
On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 08:23:55AM +0200, Sven Joachim was
heard to say:
> Oh well. :-( Looks like I'll have to try the experimental aptitude.
Just FYI, I expect to upload a new version in the next week or two
with a whole pile of fixes for the dependency solver.
Daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRI
On 2008-12-02 21:28 +0100, Rick Thomas wrote:
> When I do "aptitude safe-upgrade" on my sid powerpc systems, it says
> that libgnomekbd-common is being kept back. This has been going on
> for a week or more.
>
> It doesn't do that on my sid i386 systems.
>
> It doesn't seem to be hurting anything
On Dec 2, 2008, at 3:28 PM, Rick Thomas wrote:
When I do "aptitude safe-upgrade" on my sid powerpc systems, it
says that libgnomekbd-common is being kept back. This has been
going on for a week or more.
It doesn't do that on my sid i386 systems.
It doesn't seem to be hurting anything..
Steve Lamb wrote:
> Tobias Nissen wrote:
[...]
>> When in the "Preconfiguring"-stage, does `ps aux` show something
>> unusual?
>
> Looks like it is hanging on exim's preconfig?
Try purging exim4 (if you customised your config, save it beforehand)
and then do the safe-upgrade. If that finishe
Tobias Nissen wrote:
> Does `aptitude -v` give relevant additional output?
Nope.
> When in the "Preconfiguring"-stage, does `ps aux` show something unusual?
Looks like it is hanging on exim's preconfig?
root 19494 7.3 14.7 52668 38816 pts/1Sl+ 10:59 0:17 aptitude -v
safe-up
Steve Lamb wrote:
> Any ideas why aptitude is hanging at "Preconfiguring Packages..."
> on a safe-upgrade? This is in testing.
[...]
Does `aptitude -v` give relevant additional output? When in the
"Preconfiguring"-stage, does `ps aux` show something unusual?
Regards,
Tobias
pgpnPdVbGTenG.
31 matches
Mail list logo
