On 10401 March 1977, Jamie Rollins wrote: > The following packages have unmet dependencies: > libpam-ldap: Depends: libc6 (>= 2.3.5-1) but 2.3.2.ds1-22 is to be installed > E: Broken packages > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I originally thought this was an issue with libpam-ldap, but the libpam-ldap > maintainer says that this is an issue for the amd64 maintainers. Is > libpam-ldap > supposed to be a newer version than it is? Its not "amd64 specific". > What exactly is going on here? Welcome in the wonderful world of a development version. :) What you see is that the newer libpam-ldap, depending on a newer glibc, is in etch, the glibc itself not. glibc went unstable->testing today, so that is solved, its 2.3.5-6 now. -- bye Joerg Some AM to his NM on [11 Aug. 2004]: You already won't get through Front Desk and Account Manager approvals before sarge,[...] [Note: He made it! :) ] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
