Re: apt-get changelog [was: needrestart no longer depends on libmodule-scandeps-perl?]

Charles Curley wrote: > On Wed, 20 Nov 2024 06:22:50 +0100 > wrote: > > > Hm. "apt-get changelog needrestart" works for me? Since apt delegates > > to apt-get, it should do the same... in fact, it works, too. > > > > What's missing? > > Possibly trixie v. bookworm. Specifically, I think it ha

Re: apt-get changelog [was: needrestart no longer depends on libmodule-scandeps-perl?]

On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 06:36:08AM -0700, Charles Curley wrote: > On Wed, 20 Nov 2024 06:22:50 +0100 > wrote: > > > Hm. "apt-get changelog needrestart" works for me? Since apt delegates > > to apt-get, it should do the same... in fact, it works, too. > > > > What's missing? > > Possibly trixie

Re: apt-get changelog [was: needrestart no longer depends on libmodule-scandeps-perl?]

On Wed, 20 Nov 2024 06:22:50 +0100 wrote: > Hm. "apt-get changelog needrestart" works for me? Since apt delegates > to apt-get, it should do the same... in fact, it works, too. > > What's missing? Possibly trixie v. bookworm. Bookworm: charles@issola:~$ apt-get changelog needrestart Err:1 htt

Re: apt-get aborts in subshell with redirections on Debian 12

On 26/09/2023 12:06, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:52:09AM +0900, John Crawley wrote: On 25/09/2023 20:21, Greg Wooledge wrote: Given the presence of an /etc/sudoers.dpkg-dist file on my system, which does in fact contain this: # This fixes CVE-2005-4890 and possibly breaks s

Re: apt-get aborts in subshell with redirections on Debian 12

On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:52:09AM +0900, John Crawley wrote: > On 25/09/2023 20:21, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > Given the presence of an /etc/sudoers.dpkg-dist file on my system, > > which does in fact contain this: > > > > # This fixes CVE-2005-4890 and possibly breaks some versions of kdesu > > #

Re: apt-get aborts in subshell with redirections on Debian 12

On 25/09/2023 20:21, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 11:14:24AM +0200, Michael wrote: so i looked into /etc/sudoers and all /etc/sudoers.d/* and found two suspicous flags: /etc/sudoers: Defaults use_pty /etc/sudoers.d/0pwfeedback: Defaults pwfeedback then consulting the sud

Re: apt-get aborts in subshell with redirections on Debian 12

Many thanks to Michael for finding the change in sudo behaviour! For historical accuracy: On 25/09/2023 20:24, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 01:35:38PM +0900, John Crawley wrote: 4) In a bash shell as root (e.g. "su" or "sudo -s"), do: errors=$(apt-get install mirage 2>&1 1

Re: apt-get aborts in subshell with redirections on Debian 12

On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 01:35:38PM +0900, John Crawley wrote: > > 4) In a bash shell as root (e.g. "su" or "sudo -s"), do: > > > > errors=$(apt-get install mirage 2>&1 1>/dev/tty) > > -bash: syntax error near unexpected token `2' > > So bash as root has a problem with the redirection. At th

Re: apt-get aborts in subshell with redirections on Debian 12

On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 11:14:24AM +0200, Michael wrote: > so i looked into /etc/sudoers and all /etc/sudoers.d/* and found two > suspicous flags: > > /etc/sudoers: > Defaults use_pty > > /etc/sudoers.d/0pwfeedback: > Defaults pwfeedback > > then consulting the sudo manpage convinced me, i

Re: apt-get aborts in subshell with redirections on Debian 12

hey, i was curious, so i tried it on the only machine i have sudo installed on, which is my Debian based Ubuntu based LinuxMint Laptop. micha@HP-Laptop: ~ > errors=$(sudo apt-get install mirage 2>&1 1>/dev/tty) [sudo] password for micha: Reading package lists... Done

Re: apt-get aborts in subshell with redirections on Debian 12

On 25/09/2023 12:42, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 11:58:13AM +0900, John Crawley wrote: adduser tmp adduser tmp sudo Log in to tmp (no graphical session set up), and the results are the same: behaviour in a bash shell is wrong, everything else works. I simply can't reproduce

Re: apt-get aborts in subshell with redirections on Debian 12

On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 11:58:13AM +0900, John Crawley wrote: > adduser tmp > adduser tmp sudo > > Log in to tmp (no graphical session set up), and the results are the same: > behaviour in a bash shell is wrong, everything else works. I simply can't reproduce your results at all. unicorn:~$ sud

Re: apt-get aborts in subshell with redirections on Debian 12

On 25/09/2023 11:58, John Crawley wrote: So the 32bit system is different?? Doesn't semm to be that. amd64 Bookworm VM behaves the same way. -- John

Re: apt-get aborts in subshell with redirections on Debian 12

Thanks for the ideas! On 25/09/2023 09:36, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 09:10:28AM +0900, John Crawley wrote: I just tried, and yes it runs OK when the commands are in a script. But type directly into the terminal: errors=$(sudo apt-get install mirage 2>&1 1>/dev/tty) To see t

Re: apt-get aborts in subshell with redirections on Debian 12

On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 09:10:28AM +0900, John Crawley wrote: > On 24/09/2023 21:36, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 12:03:12PM +0200, Michel Verdier wrote: > > > #!/bin/bash > > > errors=$(sudo apt-get install unknown 2>&1 1>/dev/tty) > > > echo "output: $errors" > > > errors=$(su

Re: apt-get aborts in subshell with redirections on Debian 12

On 24/09/2023 21:36, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 12:03:12PM +0200, Michel Verdier wrote: #!/bin/bash errors=$(sudo apt-get install unknown 2>&1 1>/dev/tty) echo "output: $errors" errors=$(sudo apt-get install mirage 2>&1 1>/dev/tty) echo "output: $errors" [...] It waits until I

Re: apt-get aborts in subshell with redirections on Debian 12

On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 12:03:12PM +0200, Michel Verdier wrote: > #!/bin/bash > errors=$(sudo apt-get install unknown 2>&1 1>/dev/tty) > echo "output: $errors" > errors=$(sudo apt-get install mirage 2>&1 1>/dev/tty) > echo "output: $errors" > > [...] > It waits until I type 'n' Same here.

Re: apt-get aborts in subshell with redirections on Debian 12

On 2023-09-24, John Crawley wrote: > errors=$( sudo apt-get install mirage 2>&1 1>/dev/tty ) > echo "$errors" #!/bin/bash errors=$(sudo apt-get install unknown 2>&1 1>/dev/tty) echo "output: $errors" errors=$(sudo apt-get install mirage 2>&1 1>/dev/tty) echo "output: $errors" debian version 12.1

Re: apt-get under Kali Linux reports wrong data rate.

On Sat, Dec 24, 2022 at 2:27 PM Mark <196...@protonmail.com> wrote: > > I have no idea who to report this issue to. For Kali issues, see https://www.kali.org/community/ Jeff

Re: apt-get under Kali Linux reports wrong data rate.

On Sat, Dec 24, 2022 at 07:08:20PM +, Mark wrote: > I have no idea who to report this issue to. > > Under latest build of Kali Linux i have noticed the download speed with > apt-get commands, it shows K Bits/s and should in fact be K bits/s > The difference between Bytes & Bits is important.

Re: Re: Re: apt-get dist-upgrade keeping back some packets

On Fri, 23 Sep 2022 07:51:15 +0200 Gionatan Danti wrote: Using libsystemd0 as an example, apt-cache policy shown the installed packages with score 100, and an available update with score 500. Still, the update was not installed until I manually specified the package on the apt-get dist-upgrade

Re: Re: apt-get dist-upgrade keeping back some packets

On Thu, 22 Sep 2022 19:33:20 -0400 Greg Wooledge wrote: You've either got a Frankendebian system, or a pin. Or both. Review your sources.list and sources.list.d/* and see if you've mixed different branches, or different operating systems. Or pick a package from the "kept back" list, and do

Re: apt-get dist-upgrade keeping back some packets

On 23/09/2022 00:33, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 01:04:26AM +0200, Gionatan Danti wrote: root@localhost:/var/log/apt# apt-get dist-upgrade Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done Calculating upgrade... Done The following p

Re: apt-get dist-upgrade keeping back some packets

On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 01:04:26AM +0200, Gionatan Danti wrote: > root@localhost:/var/log/apt# apt-get dist-upgrade > Reading package lists... Done > Building dependency tree... Done > Reading state information... Done > Calculating upgrade... Done > The following packages have been kept back: >

Re: apt-get -qq install

Curt wrote: > On 2022-08-03, Victor Sudakov wrote: > > > > > > Curt wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > I'm trying to quiet apt's output by using `apt-get -qqy` in a CI/CD > >> > pipeline, however I still see ugly stuff like this in my CI/CD log: > > >> Quiet level 2 implies -y. > > > > An extra -y won't

Re: apt-get -qq install

On 2022-08-03, Victor Sudakov wrote: > > > Curt wrote: >> > >> > >> > I'm trying to quiet apt's output by using `apt-get -qqy` in a CI/CD >> > pipeline, however I still see ugly stuff like this in my CI/CD log: >> Quiet level 2 implies -y. > > An extra -y won't do any harm, especially if some day

Re: apt-get -qq install

Curt wrote: > > > > > > I'm trying to quiet apt's output by using `apt-get -qqy` in a CI/CD > > pipeline, however I still see ugly stuff like this in my CI/CD log: > > Quiet level 2 implies -y. An extra -y won't do any harm, especially if some day someone decides to remove one -q to debug the pip

Re: apt-get -qq install

David Christensen wrote: > >>> > >>> (Un)fortunately this is a CI/CD pipeline, the VM and its data will be > >>> gone forever after the build. Unless I care to keep apt output as an > >>> artifact somewhere which is IMHO an overkill. I just want an concise > >>> CI/CD log without interactive bells

Re: apt-get -qq install

davidson wrote: > > Thank you, how do you activate this option? I've just tried > > `apt-get -o quiet::NoProgress=true -qqy ...` > > I would do it that way too. > > > but the "Reading database ... 5%" stuff is still there. > > Yeah, after some unsatisfying experimentation I've had no luck either

Re: apt-get -qq install

On 8/2/22 17:17, Victor Sudakov wrote: David Christensen wrote: On 8/2/22 15:53, Victor Sudakov wrote: (Un)fortunately this is a CI/CD pipeline, the VM and its data will be gone forever after the build. Unless I care to keep apt output as an artifact somewhere which is IMHO an overkill. I just

Re: apt-get -qq install

On 2022-08-02, Victor Sudakov wrote: > > Dear Colleagues, > > I'm trying to quiet apt's output by using `apt-get -qqy` in a CI/CD > pipeline, however I still see ugly stuff like this in my CI/CD log: Quiet level 2 implies -y. > Selecting previously unselected package php-common. That's dpkg oup

Re: apt-get -qq install

On Tue, 2 Aug 2022, Victor Sudakov wrote: David Wright wrote: On Tue 02 Aug 2022 at 18:27:22 (+), Victor Sudakov wrote: I'm trying to quiet apt's output by using `apt-get -qqy` in a CI/CD pipeline, however I still see ugly stuff like this in my CI/CD log: Selecting previously unselected p

Re: apt-get -qq install

On Tue, 2 Aug 2022 Victor Sudakov wrote: davidson wrote: I'm trying to quiet apt's output by using `apt-get -qqy` in a CI/CD pipeline, however I still see ugly stuff like this in my CI/CD log: Selecting previously unselected package php-common. (Reading database ... (Reading database ... 5% (R

Re: apt-get -qq install

David Christensen wrote: > On 8/2/22 15:53, Victor Sudakov wrote: > > > > (Un)fortunately this is a CI/CD pipeline, the VM and its data will be > > gone forever after the build. Unless I care to keep apt output as an > > artifact somewhere which is IMHO an overkill. I just want an concise > > CI/C

Re: apt-get -qq install

On 8/2/22 15:53, Victor Sudakov wrote: David Christensen wrote: I don't actually like the idea of redirecting apt-get's output to /dev/null because I want to see the list of packages installed, but without these pseudographics. Do you think it's possible? Any ideas? I prefer the idea of coll

Re: apt-get -qq install

David Christensen wrote: > > > > I don't actually like the idea of redirecting apt-get's output to > > /dev/null because I want to see the list of packages installed, but without > > these pseudographics. Do you think it's possible? Any ideas? > > > I prefer the idea of collecting all of the dat

Re: apt-get -qq install

davidson wrote: > > > > I'm trying to quiet apt's output by using `apt-get -qqy` in a CI/CD > > pipeline, however I still see ugly stuff like this in my CI/CD log: > > > > Selecting previously unselected package php-common. > > (Reading database ... > > (Reading database ... 5% > > (Reading databas

Re: apt-get -qq install

On 8/2/22 11:27, Victor Sudakov wrote: Dear Colleagues, I'm trying to quiet apt's output by using `apt-get -qqy` in a CI/CD pipeline, however I still see ugly stuff like this in my CI/CD log: Selecting previously unselected package php-common. (Reading database ... (Reading database ... 5% (Rea

Re: apt-get -qq install

On Tue, 2 Aug 2022 Victor Sudakov wrote: Dear Colleagues, I'm trying to quiet apt's output by using `apt-get -qqy` in a CI/CD pipeline, however I still see ugly stuff like this in my CI/CD log: Selecting previously unselected package php-common. (Reading database ... (Reading database ... 5% (R

Re: apt-get -qq install

David Wright wrote: > On Tue 02 Aug 2022 at 18:27:22 (+), Victor Sudakov wrote: > > I'm trying to quiet apt's output by using `apt-get -qqy` in a CI/CD > > pipeline, however I still see ugly stuff like this in my CI/CD log: > > > > Selecting previously unselected package php-common. > > (Readi

Re: apt-get -qq install

On Tue 02 Aug 2022 at 18:27:22 (+), Victor Sudakov wrote: > I'm trying to quiet apt's output by using `apt-get -qqy` in a CI/CD > pipeline, however I still see ugly stuff like this in my CI/CD log: > > Selecting previously unselected package php-common. > (Reading database ... > (Reading data

Re: apt-get and signatures couldn't be verified etc

On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 01:52:52PM +1000, Fred 1 wrote: > > vagrant@buster:/mnt/debian_build/apt-1.8.2.3$ ls -ld /var/lib/apt > /var/lib/apt/lists /var/lib/apt/lists/partial > drwxr-xr-x 5 root root 4096 Aug 17 04:22 /var/lib/apt > drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 Aug 18 01:12 /var/lib/apt/lists > drwx

Re: apt-get and signatures couldn't be verified etc

vagrant@buster:/mnt/debian_build/apt-1.8.2.3$ ls -ld /var/lib/apt /var/lib/apt/lists /var/lib/apt/lists/partial drwxr-xr-x 5 root root 4096 Aug 17 04:22 /var/lib/apt drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 Aug 18 01:12 /var/lib/apt/lists drwx-- 2 _apt root 4096 Aug 18 01:12 /var/lib/apt/lists/partial

Re: apt-get and signatures couldn't be verified etc

On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 11:12:21AM +1000, Fred 1 wrote: > "W: Download is performed unsandboxed as root as file > '/mnt/debian_build/rootfs/var/lib/apt/lists/partial/deb.debian.org_debian_dists_stable_InRelease' > couldn't be accessed by user '_apt'. - pkgAcquire::Run (13: Permission > denied) Ch

Re: Apt-get vs Aptitude vs Apt

On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 1:58 AM Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > On Ma, 11 aug 20, 15:33:53, Javier Barroso wrote: > > > > I swiched from aptitude to apt-get/apt some years ago > > > > aptitude need love :( > > > > My problem was mixing 64 and 32 bits packages. Seem aptitude didn't do a > > good job > >

Re: Apt-get vs Aptitude vs Apt

On Ma, 11 aug 20, 15:33:53, Javier Barroso wrote: > > I swiched from aptitude to apt-get/apt some years ago > > aptitude need love :( > > My problem was mixing 64 and 32 bits packages. Seem aptitude didn't do a > good job > > Reading Planet debian and transitions and apt-listbugs (or how It is

Re: Apt-get vs Aptitude vs Apt

El mar., 11 ago. 2020 13:31, Andrei POPESCU escribió: > On Vi, 07 aug 20, 13:31:53, Default User wrote: > > Hey guys, > > > > Recently there was a thread about aptitude dependency resolution > > limitations. > > If you are referring to the limitations of 'aptitude why', this 1) > reverse dependen

Re: Apt-get vs Aptitude vs Apt

On Vi, 07 aug 20, 13:31:53, Default User wrote: > Hey guys, > > Recently there was a thread about aptitude dependency resolution > limitations. If you are referring to the limitations of 'aptitude why', this 1) reverse dependency and 2) apt / apt-get don't even have (an equivalent for) this.

Re: Apt-get vs Aptitude vs Apt

On Sat, 08 Aug 2020 13:06:50 +0200 Johann Klammer wrote: > On 08/07/2020 10:10 PM, Joe wrote: > > On Fri, 7 Aug 2020 13:31:53 -0400 > > Default User wrote: > > > >> Hey guys, > >> > >> Recently there was a thread about aptitude dependency resolution > >> limitations. > >> > >> Years ago, I be

Re: Apt-get vs Aptitude vs Apt

On 08/07/2020 10:10 PM, Joe wrote: > On Fri, 7 Aug 2020 13:31:53 -0400 > Default User wrote: > >> Hey guys, >> >> Recently there was a thread about aptitude dependency resolution >> limitations. >> >> Years ago, I believe I read in the Debian documentation that aptitude >> was preferred to apt-ge

Re: Apt-get vs Aptitude vs Apt

* 2020-08-07 20:04:24-03, riveravaldez wrote: > On Friday, August 7, 2020, Joe wrote: >> I believe it is still aptitude. >> >> However, the length of time it takes increases sharply with number of >> packages to be upgraded. If you have more than a hundred or so, (not >> unusual on unstable) it m

Re: Apt-get vs Aptitude vs Apt

On Friday, August 7, 2020, Joe wrote: > On Fri, 7 Aug 2020 13:31:53 -0400 > Default User wrote: >> So, all other things being equal, which is currently considered to be >> the best at dependency resolution? > > I believe it is still aptitude. > > However, the length of time it takes increases sha

Re: Apt-get vs Aptitude vs Apt

On Fri, 7 Aug 2020 13:31:53 -0400 Default User wrote: > Hey guys, > > Recently there was a thread about aptitude dependency resolution > limitations. > > Years ago, I believe I read in the Debian documentation that aptitude > was preferred to apt-get, because it seemed to have better dependency

Re: apt-get build-dep emacs-gtk: unmet dependencies

> It looks as though you have installed from security.debian.org but now > it's not in your sources.list. If you add a line like > > deb http://security.debian.org/ buster/updates main contrib non-free > > then do "apt-get update", does that help the "apt-get build-dep"? This seems to hav

Re: Re: apt-get build-dep emacs-gtk: unmet dependencies

> > $ apt-cache policy libtiff-dev libtiff5 > > The command (w/ libidn2-0 added) reports: > > libtiff-dev: > Installed: (none) > Candidate: 4.0.10-4 > Version table: > 4.0.10-4 500 > 500 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian stable/main amd64 Packages > libtiff5: > Installed: 4.1.0

Re: apt-get build-dep emacs-gtk: unmet dependencies

> You could try downgrading the two library packages explicitly: > > $ apt-get install libtiff5=1.0.10-4 libidn2-0=2.0.5-1 This is what I tried eventually, and it worked, thanks! > That might result in other errors if doing this breaks versioned > dependencies from other packages, but it's at lea

Re: apt-get build-dep emacs-gtk: unmet dependencies

On 2020-02-02 at 17:57, İ. Göktuğ Kayaalp wrote: >> In turn, please respond on-list only > > I'll try, but I can't use my usual MUA ATM, so sorry if I fail at that. > >> $ apt-cache policy libtiff-dev libtiff5 > > The command (w/ libidn2-0 added) reports: > > libtiff-dev: > Installed: (none)

Re: apt-get build-dep emacs-gtk: unmet dependencies

> In turn, please respond on-list only I'll try, but I can't use my usual MUA ATM, so sorry if I fail at that. > $ apt-cache policy libtiff-dev libtiff5 The command (w/ libidn2-0 added) reports: libtiff-dev: Installed: (none) Candidate: 4.0.10-4 Version table: 4.0.10-4 500 50

Re: apt-get build-dep emacs-gtk: unmet dependencies

> In my experience with 8 and before, yes, it may be a sign of trouble > ahead. Was there an apt-get process spinning on a CPU after that point > in the install? I didn't check, so IDK. > IIRC the network-assisted install of a package may have failed because > the pkg couldn't be found online (sa

Re: apt-get build-dep emacs-gtk: unmet dependencies

İ. Göktuğ Kayaalp wrote: >> But libgnutls28-dev is in buster > > They all are, the problem is that build-dep:emacs requires packages > which seem to require some downgrades. These are not major downgrades, > but minor version or debian package version: > > libtiff-dev : Depends: libtiff5 (= 4.0

Re: apt-get build-dep emacs-gtk: unmet dependencies

On Sun, Feb 2, 2020, 9:51 AM İ. Göktuğ Kayaalp wrote: > Hi all, > > Lastly, there was an error during installation yesterday, package > installation was paused when I returned to my computer, so I restarted > the installation process. It downloaded one more package and installed > it, and t

Re: apt-get build-dep emacs-gtk: unmet dependencies

(I'm replying both public and private in response to your request for such in another message. In turn, please respond on-list only - preferably to the copy transmitted via the list, if possible; the way you replied to deloptes seems to have produced the desired effect, at least by what is publicly

Re: apt-get build-dep emacs-gtk: unmet dependencies

BTW I'd really appreciate if you could reply to me on-list instead of to the list only, given I'm not subscribed to the list. Thanks a lot in advance! -- İ. Göktuğ Kayaalp / @cadadr / pgp: 024C 30DD 597D 142B 49AC 40EB 465C D949 B101 2427

Re: apt-get build-dep emacs-gtk: unmet dependencies

> But libgnutls28-dev is in buster They all are, the problem is that build-dep:emacs requires packages which seem to require some downgrades. These are not major downgrades, but minor version or debian package version: libtiff-dev : Depends: libtiff5 (= 4.0.10-4) but 4.1.0+git191117-2~deb10u1 is

Re: apt-get build-dep emacs-gtk: unmet dependencies

İ. Göktuğ Kayaalp wrote: > I follow Emacs' master branch for my day-to-day use, so I need to build > it manually for my daily workflow.  Yesterday I did a fresh reinstall of > Debian 10, after which I haven't been able to install build dependencies > for emacs25 or emacs-gtk.  The error is as foll

Re: apt-get install refuses to installs older versions of dependencies

On Mon 01 Jul 2019 at 13:45:30 (+), Fabian peter Hammerle wrote: > > Presumably by employing the same method that linux-image uses: > > by moving/copying the version number into the packages' names, > > foo-1 and foo-2. > > Thanks for your suggestion > > We are using CI/CD pipelines that depl

Re: apt-get install refuses to installs older versions of dependencies

On Mon 01 Jul 2019 at 07:32:20 (+), Fabian peter Hammerle wrote: > I set up an APT repository containing 2 packages: foo and bar > > The repository contains 2 versions of foo: 1.0.0 and 2.0.0 > and 2 versions of bar: 3.0.0 and 4.0.0 > > foo 1.0.0 depends on bar 3.0.0 > foo 2.0.0 depends on ba

Re: apt-get install refuses to installs older versions of dependencies

On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 07:32:20AM +, Fabian peter Hammerle wrote: > Dear Debian Users, > > I set up an APT repository containing 2 packages: foo and bar > > The repository contains 2 versions of foo: 1.0.0 and 2.0.0 > and 2 versions of bar: 3.0.0 and 4.0.0 [...] > I get the same result whe

Re: apt-get update error

On 4/30/19, Curt wrote: > On 2019-04-29, Bob Bernstein wrote: >> Thank you guys! >> >> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 03:36:24PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: >> >>> This could have been communicated or handled a bit more > smoothly. >> >> Can I safely assume you are referring to how the organization hand

Re: apt-get update error

On 2019-04-29, Bob Bernstein wrote: > Thank you guys! > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 03:36:24PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > >> This could have been communicated or handled a bit more > smoothly. > > Can I safely assume you are referring to how the organization handled it, and > not my email? > I

Re: apt-get update error

Thank you guys! On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 03:36:24PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > This could have been communicated or handled a bit more > smoothly. Can I safely assume you are referring to how the organization handled it, and not my email? All best, -- "In our age there is no such thing a

Re: apt-get update error

On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 15:31 -0400, Bob Bernstein wrote: > -snip- > deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ jessie main contrib non-free > > deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ jessie main contrib non-free > > deb http://security.debian.org/ jessie/updates main contrib non-free > > deb-src http://sec

Re: apt-get update error

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 03:31:18PM -0400, Bob Bernstein wrote: > W: Failed to fetch > http://deb.debian.org/debian/dists/jessie-updates/InRelease Unable to find > expected entry 'main/source/Sources' in Release file (Wrong sources.list > entry or malformed file) There is no more jessie-updates

Re: apt-get upgrade problem on Jessie

* rhkra...@gmail.com [2018-12-25 09:21 -0500]: [...] > But now I'm at this point: > > root@s31:~# apt-get upgrade > Reading package lists... Done > Building dependency tree > Reading state information... Done > Calculating upgrade... Done > The following packages have been kept back: > firmwa

Re: apt-get upgrade problem on Jessie

On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 09:21:39 -0500 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > [snip] > > But now I'm at this point: > > root@s31:~# apt-get upgrade > Reading package lists... Done > Building dependency tree > Reading state information... Done > Calculating upgrade... Done > The following packages have been kep

Re: apt-get upgrade problem on Jessie

On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 09:21:39AM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > Thanks for the reply, it helped a lot -- I seem to have one problem remaining > (below). [...] > df told me that /var was at 100%, and /boot was at 98%. "apt-get autoclean" or its more drastic sibling "apt-get clean" might be

Re: apt-get upgrade problem on Jessie

Thanks for the reply, it helped a lot -- I seem to have one problem remaining (below). On Monday, December 24, 2018 06:22:58 PM Elimar Riesebieter wrote: > You need to > # apt install firmware-realtek Ok, I did the apt-get install firmware-realtek and that got rid of the complaints about the 816

Re: apt-get upgrade problem on Jessie

Thanks very much -- that helped a lot -- there is one outstanding problem, but, for various reasons, I don't have time for a full reply atm -- I'll try to reply more fully tomorrow or the day after. On Monday, December 24, 2018 06:22:58 PM Elimar Riesebieter wrote: > * rh kramer [2018-12-24 18:

Re: apt-get upgrade problem on Jessie

* rh kramer [2018-12-24 18:10 -0500]: > On my Jessie system, for something like the last 2 to 3 months, I've been > getting an error like the following whenever I do an apt-get update / > apt-get upgrade cycle. [...] > Ok, it looks like I have the r8169 as I see this: > > r8169

Re: [SOLVED] Re: apt-get update hangs forever

On 7/15/18, deloptes wrote: > Carl Fink wrote: > >> May we assume you tried switching repos? Because the only times I've >> seen that, a particular repository was unreachable. > > no, I have not switched anything, but your answer helped me rewind the tape > back and yes I have added one source (Si

[SOLVED] Re: apt-get update hangs forever

Carl Fink wrote: > May we assume you tried switching repos? Because the only times I've > seen that, a particular repository was unreachable. no, I have not switched anything, but your answer helped me rewind the tape back and yes I have added one source (Signal) by myself and the stupid skype pa

Re: apt-get update hangs forever

On 07/15/2018 06:27 AM, deloptes wrote: Hi on one of my machines apt-get update hangs forever. Get:32 http://ftp.at.debian.org/debian stretch/non-free i386 Packages [69.7 kB] Get:33 http://ftp.at.debian.org/debian stretch/non-free Translation-en [80.6 kB] 0% [Working] What can I do to understa

Re: apt-get: Error: Timeout was reached

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 10:50:47AM +0200, Rainer Dorsch wrote: > Hi Tomás, > > many thanks for your response :-) [...] > retry temporary address regeneration > Apr 21 10:36:01 master kernel: [3019221.240105] IPv6: ipv6_create_tempaddr: [...] > Al

Re: apt-get: Error: Timeout was reached

Hi Tomás, many thanks for your response :-) Am Samstag, 21. April 2018, 08:43:20 CEST schrieb to...@tuxteam.de: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 10:20:12PM +0200, Rainer Dorsch wrote: > > Am Freitag, 20. April 2018, 22:13:11 CEST schrieb to...@tuxteam.de: > > > curl -I http://security.debian.org/debian-

Re: apt-get: Error: Timeout was reached

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 10:20:12PM +0200, Rainer Dorsch wrote: > Am Freitag, 20. April 2018, 22:13:11 CEST schrieb to...@tuxteam.de: > > curl -I http://security.debian.org/debian-security/ > > root@master:~/tmp# curl -I http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian

Re: apt-get: Error: Timeout was reached

Hi, I just realized sometimes it also shows in apt-get upgrade: [...] Setting up libreoffice-writer (1:5.2.7-1+deb9u4) ... Setting up libreoffice-base (1:5.2.7-1+deb9u4) ... Setting up libreoffice-report-builder-bin (1:5.2.7-1+deb9u4) ... Setting up libreoffice-report-builder (1:5.2.7-1+deb9u4) .

Re: apt-get: Error: Timeout was reached

Hi, On Fri, 20 Apr 2018 22:20:12 +0200 Rainer Dorsch wrote: > root@master:~# cat /etc/apt/sources.list (...) > deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security stretch/updates main > contrib non-free > deb-src http://security.debian.org/debian-security stretch/updates main > contrib non-free her

Re: apt-get: Error: Timeout was reached

Am Freitag, 20. April 2018, 22:13:11 CEST schrieb to...@tuxteam.de: > curl -I http://security.debian.org/debian-security/ root@master:~/tmp# curl -I http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ HTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 20:19:14 GMT Server: Apache/2.4.10 (Debian) Content-Type: text/html;charset=U

Re: apt-get: Error: Timeout was reached

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 10:02:40PM +0200, Rainer Dorsch wrote: > Hi, > > I see often the error: > Error: Timeout was reached > during an apt-get update. [...] > Hit:2 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian stretch Release >

Re: apt-get update on sid: Hash Sum mismatch

Sven Joachim writes: > On 2018-04-14 17:24 +0200, Felix Natter wrote: > >> I shut down a virtualbox sid VM, and it turned out it was running >> "unattended upgrades". On next start, apt-get update fails: >> >> = >> Get:22 http://ftp2.de.debian.org/d

Re: apt-get update on sid: Hash Sum mismatch

On 04/14/2018 08:24 AM, Felix Natter wrote: > apt-get update on sid: Hash Sum mismatch That means try again later or try a different source. :) Cheers! -- Jimmy Johnson Devuan Beowulf - TDE-Trinity R14.0.5 - AMD A8-7600 - EXT4 at sda8 Registered Linux User #380263

Re: apt-get update on sid: Hash Sum mismatch

On 2018-04-14 17:24 +0200, Felix Natter wrote: > I shut down a virtualbox sid VM, and it turned out it was running > "unattended upgrades". On next start, apt-get update fails: > > = > Get:22 http://ftp2.de.debian.org/debian unstable/contrib amd64 Co

Re: apt-get update error

Op 08-02-18 om 22:27 schreef Sven Hartge: Forest Dean Feighner wrote: On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 3:36 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 03:26:40PM -0500, Forest Dean Feighner wrote: W: http://security.debian.org/debian-security/dists/stretch/updates/InRelease: The key(s) in the

Re: apt-get update error

Forest Dean Feighner wrote: > On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 3:36 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 03:26:40PM -0500, Forest Dean Feighner wrote: >>> W: >>> http://security.debian.org/debian-security/dists/stretch/updates/InRelease: >>> The key(s) in the keyring /etc/apt/trusted.gpg a

Re: apt-get update error

Ah, so the error is from using Synaptic rather than from the update of libtasn1-6? That's the only recent update I've done and I didn't realize Syaptic would write the file. Thanks Greg On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 3:36 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 03:26:40PM -0500, Forest Dea

Re: apt-get update error

On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 03:26:40PM -0500, Forest Dean Feighner wrote: > W: > http://security.debian.org/debian-security/dists/stretch/updates/InRelease: > The key(s) in the keyring /etc/apt/trusted.gpg are ignored as the file is > not readable by user '_apt' executing apt-key. > -rw--- 1 root

Re: apt-get: Why "Unable to find source package" errors?

On Mon 21 Aug 2017 at 17:02:44 -0400, Kynn Jones wrote: > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:34 AM, Darac Marjal > wrote: > > > What happens if you try to get the source package directly? > > > > % apt-get source emacs25 > I get exactly the same error. deb.debian.org does not have packages itself but

Re: apt-get: Why "Unable to find source package" errors?

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:34 AM, Darac Marjal wrote: > On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 08:08:07PM -0400, Kynn Jones wrote: > >> Example: >> >> % sudo apt-get build-dep emacs25 >> Reading package lists... Done >> E: Unable to find a source package for emacs25 >> >> I have run `apt-ge

Re: apt-get: Why "Unable to find source package" errors?

On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 08:08:07PM -0400, Kynn Jones wrote: Example:     % sudo apt-get build-dep emacs25     Reading package lists... Done     E: Unable to find a source package for emacs25 I have run `apt-get update` before running the command above, and my `/etc/apt/sources.list`

Re: apt-get: Why "Unable to find source package" errors?

On 2017-08-21, Dejan Jocic wrote: > On 21-08-17, Kynn Jones wrote: >> OK, I added the trailing / (which, BTW, I guarantee I *never* needed >> before, and I've been doing this for years), ran apt-get update, etc., but >> in the end I got the same results. >> >> Does apt-get build-dep emacs25 work

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >