Your message dated Tue, 25 Dec 2001 23:59:37 -0700 (MST)
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#119559: apt: fails on resolving dependency path but only
on specifying the package manually
has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 14 Nov 2001 10:31:07 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 14 04:31:07 2001
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from quechua.inka.de (mail.inka.de) [212.227.14.2] (mail)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 163xJz-0006JR-00; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 04:31:07 -0600
Received: from zombie.inka.de
by mail.inka.de with uucp (rmailwrap 0.4)
id 163xJw-0008ET-00; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 11:31:04 +0100
Received: from inet by zombie with local (Exim 3.32 #1 (Debian))
id 163x9B-0005py-00; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 11:19:57 +0100
From: Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: apt: fails on resolving dependency path but only on specifying the
package manually
X-Reportbug-Version: 1.35
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.35
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 11:19:57 +0100
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: apt
Version: 0.5.4
Severity: normal
| $ apt-get update
| ... updating ...
| ReadingrPackage Lists... Done
| Building Dependency Tree... Done
| $ apt-get -sd-oeDebug::pkgProblemResolver="true" install kvdr
| Reading Package Lists... Done
| Building Dependency Tree... Done
| Starting
| Starting 2
| Done
| The following extra packages will be installed:
| vdr vdr-daemon
| 3 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 10 not upgraded.
| Inst kvdr (0.41-1 localhost) []
| Inst vdr (0.98-1 localhost) []
| Inst vdr-daemon (0.98-1 localhost)
| Conf vdr (0.98-1 localhost)
| Conf vdr-daemon (0.98-1 localhost)
| Conf kvdr (0.41-1 localhost)
So, this would work.
| $ apt-get -s -o Debug::pkgProblemResolver="true" install vdr-daemon
| Reading Package Lists... Done
| Building Dependency Tree... Done
| Starting
| Starting 2
| Investigating vdr
| Or group remove for vdr
| Package vdr has broken dep on kvdr
| Considering kvdr -1 as a solution to vdr 1
| Added kvdr to the remove list
| Done
| Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
| requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
| distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
| or been moved out of Incoming.
|
| Since you only requested a single operation it is extremely likely that
| the package is simply not installable and a bug report against
| that package should be filed.
| The following information may help to resolve the situation:
|
| Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies:
| vdr-daemon: Depends: vdr (= 0.98-1) but it is not going to be installed
| E: Sorry, broken packages
But this fails. Why?
| $ apt-cache show vdr
| Package: vdr
| Version: 0.98-1
| Priority: extra
| Section: misc
| Maintainer: Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Depends: vdr-kbd | vdr-lirc | vdr-rcu | vdr-daemon
| Conflicts: kvdr (<< 0.41)
I guess because of that. But how should I enforce an update of kvdr then? I do
not want to set direct dependency, since it is not a real dependency, but a
conflict to an ancient version and an update of the application is appropriated.
| Architecture: i386
| Filename: ./vdr_0.98-1_i386.deb
| Size: 131648
| MD5sum: 5e9e88c91c39287c40ad57b23df51fd9
| Description: Video Disk Recorder for DVB-S cards, base package
| Video Disk Recorder (VDR) is a digital sat-receiver program using
| Linux and DVB-S technologies. It allows one to record MPEG2 streams,
| as well as output the stream to TV. It is also possible to watch DVDs
| (hardware accelerated) with some comfort and use a IR remote control.
| .
| This package contains files shared by different VDR versions and
| frontends.
| NOTE: You should install compatible DVB drivers before using these
| programs.
| installed-size: 664
|
| Package: vdr
| Priority: extra
| Section: misc
| Installed-Size: 419
| Maintainer: Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Architecture: i386
| Version: 0.96-4
| Depends: vdr-kbd | vdr-lirc | vdr-rcu | vdr-daemon
| Filename: pool/main/v/vdr/vdr_0.96-4_i386.deb
| Size: 128912
| MD5sum: 5ff48dd01921cf598c022af6516997b8
| Description: Video Disk Recorder for DVB-S cards, base package
| Video Disk Recorder (VDR) is a digital sat-receiver program using
| Linux and DVB-S technologies. It allows one to record MPEG2 streams,
| as well as output the stream to TV. It is also possible to watch DVDs
| (hardware accelerated) with some comfort and use a IR remote control.
| .
| This package contains files shared by different VDR versions and
| frontends.
| NOTE: You should install compatible DVB drivers before using these
| programs.
|
| $ dpkg -l *vdr*
| Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
| |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err:
uppercase=bad)
| ||/ Name Version Description
|
+++-========================-========================-================================================================
| ii kvdr 0.35-1 DVB (digital TV) Video
Disk Recorder for KDE
| pn libdvdread-dev <none> (no description available)
| ii libdvdread1 0.8.0-3 Simple foundation for
reading DVDs.
| ii libdvdread2 0.9.1-5 Simple foundation for
reading DVDs.
| ii libdvdread2-dev 0.9.1-5 Simple foundation for
reading DVDs.
| ii vdr 0.96-4 Video Disk Recorder for
DVB-S cards, base package
| ii vdr-daemon 0.96-4 Server version of
Video Disk Recorder for DVB-S cards
| un vdr-kbd <none> (no description available)
| un vdr-lirc <none> (no description available)
| un vdr-rcu <none> (no description available)
| $ exit
Gruss/Regards,
Eduard.
-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux zombie 2.4.14 #6 Die Nov 13 21:51:36 CET 2001 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Versions of packages apt depends on:
ii libc6 2.2.4-5 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 1:2.95.4-0.011006 The GNU stdc++ library
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 119559-done) by bugs.debian.org; 26 Dec 2001 06:59:38 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 26 00:59:38 2001
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from cast-ext.ab.videon.ca [206.75.216.34]
by master.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 16J82M-0004AV-00; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 00:59:38 -0600
Received: (qmail 24734 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2001 06:59:37 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO wakko.deltatee.com) ([24.82.81.190])
(envelope-sender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
by cast-ext.ab.videon.ca (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 26 Dec 2001 06:59:37 -0000
Received: from localhost
([127.0.0.1] helo=wakko.deltatee.com ident=jgg)
by wakko.deltatee.com with smtp (Exim 3.16 #1 (Debian))
id 16J82L-0000iU-00; Tue, 25 Dec 2001 23:59:37 -0700
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 23:59:37 -0700 (MST)
From: Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: APT Development Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bug#119559: apt: fails on resolving dependency path but only on
specifying the package manually
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> I guess because of that. But how should I enforce an update of kvdr
> then? I do not want to set direct dependency, since it is not a real
> dependency, but a conflict to an ancient version and an update of the
> application is appropriated.
Correct. In the presence of complicate OR groups the time required to
evaluate all the possible solutions is very high (the problem is NP), so
it doesn't, and won't.
Your situation involves a cyclic dependency between packages, that
involves an OR group - which is the worst possible situation. I advise
that you remove the cycle, or perhaps try provides - the provides logic is
a little bit more resistant to cycles.
BTW, for future references bugs are not suitable for this kind of
inquiry.
Jason
