*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 975793 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/975793
On 8 May 2012 02:46, Alexander List <996...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote:
> Public bug reported:
>
> Similar behaviour observed in #960728:
> After "aptitude update; aptitude -dy full-upgrade", aptitude loops
> s
This is not an aptitude log.
The actual error:
> 2009-10-30 08:06:36,452 ERROR No 'ubuntu-minimal'
available/downloadable after sources.list rewrite+update
This is old now anyway, marking invalid/expired.
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug
Affected users should attach files from '/var/log/dist-upgrade/'.
status incomplete
tag dist-upgrade
> Bug description:
> I upgraded 10.04 to 12.04 beta and have run update and upgrade in
> terminal.
>
tag lucid2precise
> Me too - upgraded from Ocelot and have no Shutdown button. Wesnoth i
Fabio Marconi (fabiomarconi) on 2012-04-26:
> affects: ubuntu → update-manager (Ubuntu)
> affects: update-manager (Ubuntu) → apt (Ubuntu)
Why apt?
** Tags added: dist-upgrade lucid2precise oneiric2precise
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Incomplete
--
You re
Many bugs are reported where update-alternatives has been used on
/usr/bin/python. The response is consistently that this is not
supported.[1,2]
Closing this as invalid.
[1]
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-defaults/+bug/782441/comments/1
[2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/727812
Title:
aptitude segfault
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
htt
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #659079
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=659079
** Also affects: aptitude via
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=659079
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
> Is this on track for precise? [April]
TL;DR: as far as upstream is concerned: yes and no. Some larger issues
are resolved but unless more help is received there will be many
annoyances remaining. Many of the problems are easy to fix but this
requires hack-power (i.e. you). Ways in which someo
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #629266
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629266
** Also affects: aptitude via
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629266
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 975793 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/975793
Though I was not able to (quickly) reproduce this the attached patch
should fix it.
Could affected users please test and confirm the results.
** Patch added: "0001-Avoid-dpkg-and-infinite-loop-in-download-o
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #672340
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=672340
** Changed in: aptitude
Importance: Undecided => Unknown
** Changed in: aptitude
Status: New => Unknown
** Changed in: aptitude
Remote watch: None => Debian Bug tracker #672340
-
Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make
Ubuntu better. However, your crash report is either missing or
challenging to deal with as a ".crash" file. Please follow these
instructions to have apport report a new bug about your crash that can
be dealt with by the automatic
Ok. The main thing needed is a backtrace. Try these instructions:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingProgramCrash
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Backtrace
or at least attach the crash file manually.
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: Invalid => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notificatio
> I don't know why this was marked as invalid. I was requesting the backport
> for Lucid (hence my reference to 4.11).
Description was vague and the SRU procedure had not been followed. This
will not get noticed by the sru team unless you follow these
instructions, particularly steps 3 and 4:
h
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #498424
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=498424
** Also affects: aptitude via
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=498424
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #575062
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=575062
** Also affects: aptitude via
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=575062
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
On 13 May 2012 03:17, Lanoxx <831...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote:
> This is a very serious issue. I just upgraded to 12.04 and currenly I
> cannot even install wine without getting dependency errors. apt-get want
> me to resolve it by removing about 200 packages.
It is my understanding that apt-get
On 27 June 2014 17:01, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Enrico Weigelt, metux ITS wrote:
>> Aptitude automatically selects recommended packages.
>>
>> Neither --without-recommends nor setting APT::Install-Recommends seem to
>> have any influence.
>
> At least on Debian I'm always using aptitude with
On 6 April 2014 11:05, ianorlin wrote:
> I expected the miscellanous text based programs in synaptic
> to not find graphical programs.
>
> Instead I found xcal in the list of miscellanous text based(universe)
> programs when broswing by category in synaptic. See attached screenshot
> of properties
Configuration of cloud images has nothing to do with packaging of
aptitude.
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1227425
Title
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #142699
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=142699
** Also affects: aptitude (Debian) via
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=142699
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
** No longer affects: aptitude (Debian)
--
Yo
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1236258
Title:
using apt-get gives "E: Method gave invalid 200 URI Start message" f
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1185262
Title:
ubuntu patch no-google-mock is obsolete
To manage notifications abou
> It would be nice to be able to initiate a bug reporting process on a
> selected package from within aptitude.
You mean like launching reportbug with the keypress 'B'?
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a mem
This option will not be added in aptitude.
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Opinion
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1228868
Title:
Feature Req: Improve readabili
Incomplete for too long. No detail given why this should be
specifically filed against Baltix.
** Changed in: baltix
Status: Incomplete => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs
Oneiric is no longer supported.
** Changed in: aptitude (Ubuntu Oneiric)
Status: Confirmed => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/831768
Title:
aptitude cannot handle confl
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1135687 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1135687
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1135687
GtkNotebook 0x114d4a0 is mapped but visible child GtkLabel 0x1450610 is not
mapped
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
On 08/10/2013 2:42 AM, "Scott Moser" wrote:
>
> I moved this to 'aptitude' as the bug because I'd like to keep aptitude
> in the images as it is popular with users, but I'd like to *not* have
> apt-xapian-index or at least have a way that we could turn it off.
>
Aptitude will run fine without axi
** Description changed:
[Impact]
* Inability to use aptitude on multi-arch systems. Any action which
results in a packaging conflict, or otherwise broken package, invokes
the problem resolver which will proceed to remove *all* foreign-arch
packages.
The packages are removed alwa
Ubuntu SRU Team
Based on the date of your subscription (2012-11-08) the fix /would/ be
one of the five oldest entries in the unapproved queue for Precise. It
does not appear in that queue as ubuntu-sponsors have declined to upload
without prior consideration by your team.
Please consider the rep
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1069019 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1069019
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1069019
[software-properties-gtk] can not delete, enable or modify any software
source with non-ASCII characters in the comment
--
You received this bug n
This could be another instance of bug 1069019. Please see if there are
non-ASCII text in any sources.list with this command:
$ sudo file /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/alice.list: ASCII text
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/barry.list: ASCII text
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/charlie.list: U
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1069019 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1069019
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1069019
[software-properties-gtk] can not delete, enable or modify any software
source with non-ASCII characters in the comment
--
You received this bug n
On 11 January 2013 16:58, Michael Vogt wrote:
> ** Patch added: "Trivial extension of Daniels fix for #1086997"
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/1003633/+attachment/3479965/+files/fix.diff
Please include also a comment above that line indicating why “+” will
be encoded,
On 12 January 2013 10:57, Adam Conrad wrote:
> Hello Daniel, or anyone else affected,
Note I am not affected by this issue as I use neither Ubuntu or
aptdaemon.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.n
Sebastian Heinlein (glatzor) wrote:
> The user should be allowed to override any holds, so I
> have chosen your second patch.
Yes. Ideally the /caller/ should be able to control this, as not all
requests will come so directly from the user. Please in a future
revision also expose FromUser in the
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1016294 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1016294
Steve Langasek (vorlon) wrote:
> This bug report was from a user trying to use synaptic to install;
> that's a question of synaptic supporting multiarch.
Synaptic (now) supports multiarch well enough to ins
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1016294 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1016294
Daniel Ejsing-Duun (zilvador) wrote:
> Now when talking about my case I should mentioned that apt-get
> at the same time states that I have held broken packages.
This message is sometimes incorrect.
> When
>From bug 971761, comment #37:
> These issues are, without exception, the result of local misconfiguration
> and/or local installation of mismatched library versions. It is not a bug
> in ia32-libs that users have their systems in a state that doesn't allow the
> package's dependencies to be satis
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1016294 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1016294
On 14 January 2013 12:20, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> > To our knowledge, if [dpkg.cfg.d/multiarch] is missing this can only
>> > be as a result of a manual action on your part to remove it.
>
>> See bug 10938
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 954029 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/954029
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 954029
gettext fails to install; package relationships should be with
"gettext:any", "gettext-base:any", or are not required/useful at all
--
You received t
** Changed in: ia32-libs (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1093819
Title:
ia32-libs-multiarch but it is not installable (i386 not configured)
To m
@ Wubi maintainers
Please triage this issue. It seems the installed system did not have
i386 configured as foreign architecture which a regular 12.10 install
would have.
** Summary changed:
- ia32-libs-multiarch but it is not installable (i386 not configured)
+ Wubi installed 12.10 amd64 withou
[I am not also assigning to debootstrap which has the same issue as this
is unsupported. See bug #971761, comment #37.]
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1093819
Title:
Wubi installed 1
On 26 January 2013 17:15, Quin Eirik wrote:
> And: why does it say "Please use: bzr branch http://code.launchpad.net
> /~ubuntu-desktop/gnome-terminal/ubuntu" when it is a git repo at
> git://git.gnome.org/gnome-terminal?
It refers to where /packaging/ is maintained, not the upstream source.
>
>
00aptitude is generated by user-setup, when root-login is disabled. It
contains one setting:
Aptitude::Get-Root-Command "sudo:/usr/bin/sudo";
which is also set in 05aptitude, shipped with /Ubuntu's/ aptitude
package. The user-setup code seems more universal, being conditional on
root-login disa
** Description changed:
+ aptitude::Get-Root-Command "sudo:/usr/bin/sudo";
+
+ Set in 05aptitude (aptitude) and 00aptitude (user-setup). The user-
+ setup file is generated only if root-login is disabled in the installer
+ and co-incides with settings for other programs to use sudo.
+
+ Setting
Public bug reported:
Package: aptitude
Version: 0.6.8-1ubuntu1
When viewed online [Help > User's Manual], the English README file
contains numerous character encoding errors.
The file doc/html-to-text converts a html document to text in a
particular encoding. The ubuntu patch 14_html2text_prefe
On 30 January 2013 12:23, Adam Stokes wrote:
> Everything has been fixed
Fine.
In the past few days the source of bug #1033838 has been discovered.
If the canonical location for that setting should be the user-setup
package (which IMO makes sense), then the file debian/05aptitude can
be removed,
Would you care to provide an updated patch or branch with the work in
progress?
> attempting to run the aptitude build tests fail when
> trying to find gtest.
Due to the Ubuntu package not shipping the files under /usr/src/gmock?
This difference from Debian is not obviously mentioned in the
chan
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #151987
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=151987
** Also affects: apt (Debian) via
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=151987
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
You received this bug notification because you a
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #642480
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=642480
** Also affects: apt (Debian) via
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=642480
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
You received this bug notification because you a
On 31 January 2013 04:22, stadler michel <1110...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote:
> Public bug reported:
>
> line 57 bad in the list of sources
> /etc/apt/sources.list (analyse de distribution)
Please attach this file and tell which program you use to configure
software sources.
status incomplete
*
On 30 January 2013 23:02, Adam Stokes wrote:
> My most recent work can be seen here:
>
> http://people.canonical.com/~stokes/aptitude_0.6.8.2-1ubuntu1.raring.debdiff
A diff from the Debian version would be more convenient to review.
Anyway …
+aptitude (0.6.8.2-1ubuntu1) precise; urgency=low
+
+
On 30 January 2013 23:02, Adam Stokes wrote:
> The google-mock package does provide the source under /usr/src/gmock,
They are not listed in the manifest of
google-mock_1.6.0-0ubuntu3_i386.deb? Instead there are some shared
libraries that, at upstreams request, the Debian package no longer
provid
Integration test.
# pkg-sha256-bad has a bad SHA sum, but good MD5 sum. If apt is
# checking the best available hash (as it should), this will trigger
# a hash mismatch.
-- before patch:
Test for hash ok of apt-get source -d pkg-md5-ok … PASS
Test for hash ok of apt-get source -d pkg-sha256-ok …
On 31 January 2013 12:00, shankao wrote:
> This problem has being fixed in the upstream bug #1078544. The fix has
> also being ported back to precise and quantal -proposed.
That report and its fix only applies to the aptdaemon backend. The
problem is still present in the synaptic backend, which
On 31 January 2013 12:00, shankao wrote:
> This problem has being fixed in the upstream bug #1078544. The fix has
> also being ported back to precise and quantal -proposed.
If you are interested in closing off bugs, that other report still
requires SRU verification for precise and quantal followi
On 31 January 2013 13:20, shankao wrote:
>> That report and its fix only applies to the aptdaemon backend. The
>>problem is still present in the synaptic backend, which this report
>>specifically refers to.
>
> Should not be the bug report changed to synaptic in that case?
Synaptic already has a
> For a long time the server had no sha{1,256} information in the Source
> records. But now that it has there seems to be some issues here too,
> e.g. the quantal partner archive has:
> …
> I.e. for the .dsc file there is just a md5, not a sha available
A problem for the current patch which would
> Perhaps the additional type–hash pairs
> could be stored in an auxillery structure, to avoid an immediate break.
Though I'm not sure the issue of ignoring SHA sums is serious enough to
justify such a temporary hack.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs,
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 859665 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/859665
Disassociating Debian report; this issue is related to the fuzzy version
matching.
** Changed in: apt (Debian)
Importance: Unknown => Undecided
** Changed in: apt (Debian)
Status: Confirmed => New
> This is in fact a bug in apt as well. A fresh install of 64-bit raring will
> try to pull in gnome-exe-thumbnailer:i386, which in turn will ask for
> icoutils:i386, which will then conflict:
> libunity-webapps0 : Depends: unity-webapps-service but it is not going to be
> installed
>
> Rather th
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1082291 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1082291
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1082291
package gettext 0.18.1.1-5ubuntu3 failed to install/upgrade: gettext:i386
0.18.1.1-5ubuntu3 (Multi-Arch
--
You received this bug notification beca
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1082291 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1082291
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1082291
package gettext 0.18.1.1-5ubuntu3 failed to install/upgrade: gettext:i386
0.18.1.1-5ubuntu3 (Multi-Arch
--
You received this bug notification beca
On 19 February 2013 03:54, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> I agree with the sentiment about apt, however I thought it was the
> current case that if a recommended (same-arch) package isn't available
> in the archive, it does get simply ignored.
Quite right, for ‘install’ and ‘dist-upgrade’ at least. Curi
Output from a failed install with ‘-oDebug::pkgProblemResolver=1’ is
appreciated. The Debian wine packaging is substantially different.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1123710
Title:
** Changed in: ubuntu-translations
Status: Triaged => Fix Released
** Changed in: synaptic (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/983993
Titl
Contains changes to the tree outside of debian/patches:
src/apt_options.cc, src/generic/apt/pkg_changelog.cc.
Update to patches/04_changelog misses the entire point of that file.
Now it contains only changes to “branding”, which belong in
03_branding anyway.
No attempt to address any of the outst
debian/changelog also does not mention several of the remaining changes.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1103541
Title:
Please merge aptitude 0.6.8.2-1(main) from Debian unstable (main
** Description changed:
[Impact]
* Inability to use aptitude on multi-arch systems. Any action which
results in a packaging conflict, or otherwise broken package, invokes
the problem resolver which will proceed to remove *all* foreign-arch
packages.
The packages are removed alwa
** Also affects: wine1.4 (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: lintian (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Invalid
** Changed in: gettext (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Invalid
** Changed in: debhelper (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Invalid
--
You rec
On 28 February 2013 23:05, habanany <198...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote:
> Nevertheless (Raring Ringtail) looking good
What does this mean? Do you not experience the issue on Raring, only
on older releases?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is s
This is almost certainly due to multi-arch issues in wine1.4. See bug
954029 and others.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1059069
Title:
Installing wine1.4 on amd-64 removes debhelper/
It is clear from the man page that ‘--ignore-missing’ is intended only
for packages that exist but fail to download correctly or can not be
downloaded at the time. Requesting a package that does not exist is
well outside the scope of this option and is an unsafe operation to
simply ignore.
The fo
On 3 February 2013 01:31, Miguel Milan wrote:
> E:Malformed line 3 in source list /etc/apt/sources.list (dist parse)
Attach this file. How have you recently edited your software sources?
status incomplete
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug
On 31 January 2013 21:49, stadler michel <1110...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote:
> le problème est résolu.
>
> faut-il le signaler? comment?merci
If you have fixed the problem and do not believe it was caused by a
software fault, then the report status can be set to invalid in the
web interface.
On 3 February 2013 22:26, Miguel Milan wrote:
> I fix the problem reinstalling ppa pakeg system up and running ..fyi
status invalid
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscri
On 5 February 2013 06:40, ebnf <1115...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote:
> Public bug reported:
>
> aptitude hangs when trying to update nagios-nrpe-server.
>
> Last message before stuck aptitude is: "Preparing to replace nagios-
> nrpe-server 2.12-6ubuntu2"
Provide at least the full message, which shou
affects ubuntu/nagios-nrpe
status new
** Changed in: nagios-nrpe (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1115690
Title:
aptitude hangs Preparing to
On 7 February 2013 04:45, msp3k wrote:
> When trying to --reinstall multiple packages with apt-get, it crashes
> with a segmentation fault. The command line: apt-get --reinstall
> install <2-or-more-packages...>
Provide a stacktrace and the complete output from the command,
including the full co
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 396381 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/396381
On 7 February 2013 11:06, David wrote:
> Public bug reported:
>
> I ran a dist-upgrade and had to upgrade memtest, linux image.
> When those packages got installed, apt generated a new grub.cfg
> file. Same t
On 9 February 2013 22:04, ptoche wrote:
> 2. shouldn't one expect that "purge"-ing muon would remove these lists?
No. Muon is not responsible for those lists. As indicated by the
path, they are handled by the apt package.
>
> 3. after purging, cleaning, installing again, then removing the list
** Also affects: aptitude (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/923876
Title:
FR: Limit and clean-up kernel images and headers automatica
* debian/apt.conf.autoremove: don't include linux-image*,
linux-restricted-modules*, and linux-ubuntu-modules* packages in the
list to never be autoremoved.
Aptitude in Precise and later (and earlier) carries a patch that
potentially nullifies this change. Previously the patch was redunda
See also bug #1033838 for justification that 05aptitude should be
completely removed.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/923876
Title:
FR: Limit and clean-up kernel images and headers aut
On 15 February 2013 12:30, James Sleeman <1016...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote:
> This problem of uninstallable ia32-libs affects the current Amazon EC2
> AMI's for 12.10 which Amazon presents to users in the Quick Launch
> Interface in the EC2 management console.
>
> ubuntu/images/ebs/ubuntu-quantal-
Apport information is not helpful for this report. Please answer the
questions already asked:
> Are you talking about the Check box
> and Ubuntu Icon Columns? What Screen Resolution are you running at? can you
> take a screen shot?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
> I'm beginning to think I need to make some automated
> tests for an elaborate series of multi-arch edge cases.
Hi Scott
Seems that wine is bringing a lot of these m-a issues to your desk :-)
Hopefully this:
> winetricks is actually arch: all now
will be sufficient to avoid immediately having
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #700683
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=700683
** Also affects: cabextract (Debian) via
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=700683
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
You received this bug notification becaus
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #700684
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=700684
** Also affects: msttcorefonts (Debian) via
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=700684
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
You received this bug notification bec
On 6 March 2013 20:17, David Kalnischkies <1148...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote:
> Theoretically
> apt-get remove ".*:*"
> (quotes so your shell isn't trying to expand it) would remove every
> package from your system.
> apt-get install ".*"
> on the other hand would install every available package (i
> I wonder if it didn't has been a collision with an "apt-gect clean"
> launched 2 seconds before?
Very likely, this command could remove the just downloaded packages.
Which program did you use to try to install these packages? Apt-get,
software center, synaptic, …?
--
You received this bug no
The chain of -dev and some other dependencies here is not all multi-
arch. Is there some reason why you need libsdl-ttf2.0-dev:i386 instead
of the amd64 package here?
Please attach the output of:
$ apt-get install -s -oDebug::pkgProblemResolver=1
-oDebug::pkgDepCache::Marker=1 libsdl-ttf2.0-dev
That is a lot of information. What do you claim the problem is? This:
> 1 not fully installed or removed.
or some other part?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1066557
Title:
softwar
On 12 October 2012 06:12, Edward <1065...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote:
> Public bug reported:
>
> Libreoffice won't install on my Dell Latitude D430 on Lucid Lynx. I
> tried both by using the REPO and by downloading and compiling the
> source.
No such package is in the official repository for Lucid.
On 12 October 2012 08:41, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
> No such package is in the official repository for Lucid. Provide your
> sources.list.
And any files under /etc/apt/sources.list.d
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
On 12 October 2012 06:12, Edward <1065...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote:
> ---
> with source:
>
>
> *
> * Running LibreOffice build configuration.
> *
>
This is a
** Package changed: aptitude (Ubuntu) => software-properties (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1065868
Title:
apt-add-repository is broken (cannot convert float NaN to integer)
101 - 200 of 730 matches
Mail list logo
