On 2008-10-29 13:17 +0100, Faheem Mitha wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Oct 2008, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> - Apt has a bug, it should always prefer the real package over a
>> provided one.
>
> It should be possible to track this down using logs. Does apt now have
> a log (in lenny)? The dpkg log would be less optimal for this task.
Yes, look in the /var/log/apt directory.
>>> More importantly,
>>> alternatives did not update correctly to emacs22. Isn't this set in
>>> the postinst or something?
>>
>> It is. Maybe the `emacs' alternative is set to manual on your system?
>>
>>> orwell:/home/faheem# ls -la /etc/alternatives/emacs
>>> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 2007-06-03 18:20 /etc/alternatives/emacs ->
>>> /usr/bin/emacs21-x
>>
>> Please show the output of `update-alternatives --display emacs'.
>
> orwell:/home/faheem# update-alternatives --display emacs
> emacs - status is manual.
> link currently points to /usr/bin/emacs22-x
> /usr/bin/emacs21-x - priority 24
> slave emacs.1.gz: /usr/share/man/man1/emacs.1emacs21.gz
> /usr/bin/emacs22-x - priority 25
> slave emacs.1.gz: /usr/share/man/man1/emacs.1emacs22.gz
> Current `best' version is /usr/bin/emacs22-x.
>
> I changed it to point to 22 after reporting this bug using
>
> update-alternatives --config emacs
>
> would that have changed the status to manual?
Yes. But almost certainly it had already been manual before, since the
link would have pointed to emacs22-x if it had been auto. You should
probably set it to auto, otherwise the same problem will appear again
when you upgrade to emacs23 in the future.
Cheers,
Sven
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
