Your message dated Fri, 18 Mar 2016 00:17:57 +0000
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#391377: Even more wrong solution to dependency problems
has caused the Debian Bug report #391377,
regarding tetex-extra: aptitude wants to remove tetex-extra upon dist-upgrade
to etch
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
391377: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=391377
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: tetex-extra
Version: 3.0-23~bpo.1
Severity: normal
under certain circumstances (I discovered that when logging into a woody
pbuilder, installing tetex-extra, dist-upgrading to sarge and then to
etch), aptitude refuses to update tetex-extra. It looks like this:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libxft1: Depends: xfree86-common but it is not installable
Resolving dependencies...
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:
Remove the following packages:
libxft1
xlibs
Keep the following packages at their current version:
build-essential [10.1 (now)]
dpkg-dev [1.10.28 (now)]
tetex-base [2.0.2c-8 (now)]
tetex-bin [2.0.2-30sarge4 (now)]
tetex-extra [2.0.2c-8 (now)]
tex-common [Not Installed]
texinfo [4.7-2.2 (now)]
Upgrade the following packages:
libwww0 [5.4.0-9 (now) -> 5.4.0-11 (testing)]
Score is -572
Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]
Neither tetex-bin nor texinfo depend on libxft1 (or xfree86-common). It
does depend on xlibs, however. So I press n three many times to finally get:
Resolving dependencies...
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:
Remove the following packages:
libxft1
tetex-extra
xlibs
Keep the following packages at their current version:
build-essential [10.1 (now)]
dpkg-dev [1.10.28 (now)]
Leave the following dependencies unresolved:
tetex-bin recommends libxml-parser-perl
Score is -943
Why on earth does it want to remove tetex-extra?
Depends: tetex-base (>= 3.0-11), tetex-bin (>= 2.99), ucf (>= 1.02)
Recommends: latex-beamer, latex-xcolor, lmodern, pgf, preview-latex-style,
texinfo
Is this a bug in aptitude, or a problem in tetex-extra?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
2006-10-28 12:59 Frank Küster:
Daniel Burrows <[email protected]> wrote:
All in all, I think this can probably be solved, but it's not trivial and
risks making the resolver take longer to produce worse results. The current
results are IMO not a disaster (they require manual intervention but won't
hose the system -- you'll just have to give aptitude a poke to try harder
to upgrade some packages), so we may have to live with the current situation
for etch.
I agree. In particular, I never hoped to get a solution into etch.
This bug is from a time when the resolver was very different, in the
following years to the report it was reworked heavily.
I don't know if the underlying problem was properly fixed, but in any
case we would need more recent reports with current information,
tracking a problem happening with package relationships 10 years ago is
not very easy to do.
So I am going to close the report now, please open a new report if you
keep seeing this problem with more recent versions.
Cheers.
--
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <[email protected]>
--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
Aptitude-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel
