Bug#384945: texlive system will not install [solved?]
Ross Boylan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I tested installing and removing texlive and some associated packages, not including texlive-full. The basics went without incident. However, auctex suggests catdvi, and the latter depends on tetex-base without texlive as an alternate. The problem that caused me to file this report is solved for me. Whether it indicates an upgrade issue that may affect others is your call. Oh, yes, it is an upgrade issue that affects everybody who has experimental packages installed or in state rc. But that is intended, as the message implies: , | Upgrade from experimental versions are not supported! | Please purge all texlive packages before installation. ` However, this bug report was indeed helpful and has revealed a couple of other issues, most of which have already been resolved in our SVN repository. Norbert, will you close this bug report in the changelog, or should we close it manually and let the side effects be side effects? Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Bug#384945: texlive system will not install [solved?]
I was finally able to clean up my system by using dpkg with --force-remove-reinstreq to purge preview-latex-style. This did not immediately work, because the package's postrm script attempts to invoke mktexlsr (I think--this is from memory), which wasn't there. I commented out the line, and was finally able to purge the package. Probably --force-all would have done it in one step; since the only thing in the postrm was the invocation of mktexlsr, I think the result would have been the same. I then purged every package with texlive in the name (are there any others I should zap?). I have not yet tried reinstalling; the mailing list has a report that the problem returned after a purge and install. Because I've already purged the packages, I can't answer some of the questions below. I have some comments below with more information; in particular, see bug #385784 for a diagnosis and 2 possible solutions to the apparent aptitude error (which was actually in the apt libraries). On Mon, Sep 04, 2006 at 09:38:41AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: Ross Boylan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Package: texlive Version: 2005.dfsg.1-1 Severity: normal Hi all, after reading through the bug log and what you've found out so far, it seems to me that there are a couple of issues: The various tex's have a checkered history on this system. I think I first tried texlive, found it was incompatible with some other stuff, removed it, and installed tetex. In the recent upgrade to KDE 3.5.4 kdegraphics seemed to require texlive packages, but these failed with an error that a file was owned by two packages, and that I should remove texlive. I attempted to do so. I was able to proceed with the dist-upgrade. Then I upgraded kdegraphics, which no longer seemed to require texlive. 1. Why does or did kdegraphics require texlive, and is not satisfied with tetex? After the upgrade, the dependence went away. Then I attempted to install texlive, leading to the kind of errors seen in the attached log. -- Package-specific info: ## List of ls-R files lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 27 2006-08-27 23:16 /usr/share/texmf-texlive/ls-R - /var/lib/texmf/ls-R-TEXLIVE 2. It is strange that there is only one ls-R file. Please send us the output of Well, things were in a pretty bad state. As noted in the previous response to this post, mktexlsr wasn't on the system any more. .. 5. As far as I understood, dvipdfmx calls mktexlsr unconditionally, this should probably be a separate bug. That would certainly add safety. However, this only became an issue because other dependencies were messed up, so adding tests might be overkill. [ from a later mail by Ross ] dpkg: error processing preview-latex-style (--remove): Package is in a very bad inconsistent state - you should reinstall it before attempting a removal. (Reading database ... terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::logic_error' what(): basic_string::_S_construct NULL not valid Aborted 6. We seem to have exposed a bug in aptitude - or maybe in dpkg. To find out which, please try the following: Actually, in the bug was in the apt libraries. See bug #385784 for full details, including traces, 2 different patches, a pointer to a related bug, and a reason that the dpkg code may need to change for a proper fix. Ross P.S. I will report here after doing a reinstall.
Bug#384945: texlive system will not install [solved?]
Hi Ross! On Mon, 04 Sep 2006, Ross Boylan wrote: I was finally able to clean up my system by using dpkg with Good to hear. I then purged every package with texlive in the name (are there any others I should zap?). I have not yet tried reinstalling; the mailing No, all the packages have texlive at the beginning of the name. particular, see bug #385784 for a diagnosis and 2 possible solutions to the apparent aptitude error (which was actually in the apt libraries). Uff, that was a long read. 2. It is strange that there is only one ls-R file. Please send us the output of Well, things were in a pretty bad state. As noted in the previous response to this post, mktexlsr wasn't on the system any more. I assume so. Some of the ls-R files are generated with the mktexlsr run, so as this didn't succeed, there are none. 5. As far as I understood, dvipdfmx calls mktexlsr unconditionally, this should probably be a separate bug. That would certainly add safety. However, this only became an issue because other dependencies were messed up, so adding tests might be overkill. Still, there is dh_installtex which automatically creates proper snippets. P.S. I will report here after doing a reinstall. Thanks a lot!!! Best wishes Norbert --- Dr. Norbert Preining preining AT logic DOT at Università di Siena gpg DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094 --- BALLYCUMBER One of the six half-read books lying somewhere in your bed. --- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#384945: texlive system will not install [solved?]
Ross Boylan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because I've already purged the packages, I can't answer some of the questions below. I have some comments below with more information; in particular, see bug #385784 for a diagnosis and 2 possible solutions to the apparent aptitude error (which was actually in the apt libraries). Ah, just as well - I think the most important things have already been dealt with. 5. As far as I understood, dvipdfmx calls mktexlsr unconditionally, this should probably be a separate bug. That would certainly add safety. However, this only became an issue because other dependencies were messed up, so adding tests might be overkill. The dvipdfmx maintainer has already reacted: dvipdfmx (1:20050831-2) unstable; urgency=low * Added test for /usr/bin/mktexlsr. (Closes:Bug#385013) -- Yu Guanghui [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri, 1 Sep 2006 20:00:49 +0800 P.S. I will report here after doing a reinstall. I'm waiting eagerly ;-) Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Bug#384945: texlive system will not install [solved?]
I tested installing and removing texlive and some associated packages, not including texlive-full. The basics went without incident. However, auctex suggests catdvi, and the latter depends on tetex-base without texlive as an alternate. The problem that caused me to file this report is solved for me. Whether it indicates an upgrade issue that may affect others is your call. Ross -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
