Nathaniel, you are right -- reporting a bug against -10 and hearing it
is fixed in -7 is a little strange.
WRT your error message, I have approached similar problems in the past
by using dpkg directly on the apt-downloaded .deb packages, using the
--force-overwrite option. The problem isn't the actual presence of a
file there -- it is two packages that claim to own the file.
My guess says your collection of packages may have the xconsole.real
package moving around from one package to the next between upgrades. I
don't know how well apt and/or dpkg would handle these situations.
(BTW -- when using apt to upgrade from slink to potato, using
dist-upgrade instead of just upgrade may take care of some of these
issues... )
I hope this helps explain things. I don't know for sure what happened in
your case, but usually force-overwrite does the right thing. :)
* Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001130 11:47]:
> ----- Forwarded message from Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----
>
> From: Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Zdenek Kabelac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Bug#68389: [[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: Bug#68389 acknowledged by developer
> (fixed with -7)]
> Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 20:24:31 +0100
> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Reply-To: Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Resent-From: Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Resent-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Resent-Cc: Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 19:33:11 GMT
> Resent-Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Resent-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-Debian-PR-Message: report 68389
> X-Debian-PR-Package: xbase-clients
> X-Debian-PR-Keywords:
> X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.0.1i
> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Nathaniel Rounds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----
>
> Delivery-date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 20:01:36 +0100
> Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 13:03:39 -0500 (EST)
> From: Nathaniel Rounds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Bug#68389 acknowledged by developer (fixed with -7)
>
> I assume that this email is going to a real person....
>
> Hi. I am glad to hear that someone has looked at the bug report that I
> sent in, but I can't say that I particularly understood the attached
> explaination. Here's my dilemia: I had trouble updating xbase-client, and
> thus the bulk of x-window software from slink to potato. When potato
> became the stable debain release, I figured I'd better upgrade, but I held
> the slink versions of xbase-client and the various x-window applications
> which depend ot it and upgraded the rest of my system. So here is my
> problem: if I install the potato versions and they still don't work, I
> won't have the slink versions to go back to (I don't think I can get them
> from debian anymore) and so I will be left without a working x-window.
> No fun.
>
> Perhaps if you (and by you I mean Darren Benham, his associates, or any
> wise unix guru who runs accross my email) could explain exactly what the
> developer did in closing my bug report (#68389), I could figure out if I
> can upgrade with minimal fear of hosing my system.
>
> Thanks a lot,
>
> Nathaniel Rounds
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2000, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
>
> > This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report #68389:
> > xbase-clients: package preinst needs to get rid of xconsole
> > alternative, which was filed against the xbase-clients package.
> >
> > It has been closed by one of the developers, namely
> > Zdenek Kabelac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
> >
> > Their explanation is attached below. If this explanation is
> > unsatisfactory and you have not received a better one in a separate
> > message then please contact the developer directly, or email
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] or me.
> >
> > Darren Benham
> > (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
> >
> > Received: (at 77550-done) by bugs.debian.org; 22 Nov 2000 14:18:11 +0000
> > >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 22 08:18:10 2000
> > Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Received: from aragorn.ics.muni.cz [147.251.4.33]
> > by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
> > id 13yaiv-0000vl-00; Wed, 22 Nov 2000 08:18:09 -0600
> > Received: from anxur.fi.muni.cz ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [147.251.48.3])
> > by aragorn.ics.muni.cz (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA19965
> > for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 22 Nov 2000 15:18:07 +0100 (MET)
> > Received: from dual.fi.muni.cz ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [147.251.51.21])
> > by anxur.fi.muni.cz (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA25151
> > for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 22 Nov 2000 15:18:06 +0100 (MET)
> > Received: from kabi by dual.fi.muni.cz with local (Exim 3.16 #1 (Debian))
> > id 13yait-0001rw-00; Wed, 22 Nov 2000 15:18:07 +0100
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: fixed with -7
> > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > From: Zdenek Kabelac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 15:18:07 +0100
> > Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
> --
> Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
>
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
> --
> G. Branden Robinson | <joeyh> oh my, it's a UP P III.
> Debian GNU/Linux | <doogie> dos it.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | * joeyh runs dselect
> http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ | <Overfiend> that ought to be sufficient :)
--
``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all
really impressed down here, I can tell you.''
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
