Source: darktable
Version: darktable:amd64 1.4.2-1+b3
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer,
* What led up to the situation?
I asked aptitude to install darktable:amd64 on a newly upgraded
jessie multiarch system. Dpkg reports as follows:
: nr@homedog 10074 ; dpkg --print-architecture
i386
: nr@homedog 10075 ; dpkg --print-foreign-architectures
amd64
* What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or
ineffective)?
* What was the outcome of this action?
Marking the package with the plus sign resulted in an error
messages that two dependencies of darktable:amd64 are not
satisfied. They are
libjs-prototype:amd64
libjs-scriptaculous:amd64
These packages, without the :amd64 suffix, are installed on
my system, and dpkg -s reports
Architecture: all
I suspect that something may be wrong with the dependencies.
* What outcome did you expect instead?
I expected the darktable:amd64 package to be installed.
Two other points:
- I know that in order to run the darkable binary, I will need to be
running a 64-bit kernel.
- As you may know, darktable does not work very well when it is
limited to 4GB of main memory, and upstream recommends to run the
64-bit version. I have had installed the 32-bit version and can
confirm there are significant usability problems. Thus, the
inability to install the 64-bit version has a major effect on
usability.
*** End of the template - remove these template lines ***
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 8.0
APT prefers stable
APT policy: (990, 'stable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Foreign Architectures: amd64
Kernel: Linux 3.16.0-4-686-pae (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=UTF-8) (ignored: LC_ALL set to en_US.utf8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
_______________________________________________
Pkg-phototools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-phototools-devel
