David Baron:
Luckily, using the live-CD, I was able to download and re-install the
testing packages for libc6 and friends and finally get my system
working again.
What problem are you referring to? The breakage from the missing
symlinks on amd64? That issue has been fixed some weeks ago.
The problem was flagged as a bug and then no longer appeared. Partial
installation. The error message I got was that an alleged non-dpkg-owned
library was present, too dangerous to update. However, some of the packages
were indeed updated. The resulting mix was not operational for x-windows and
some other less critical programs.
I am running 686 (32-bit) on a P4.
(Since half these files are symlinks, missing symlinks in such critical
packages are inexcusable, I think, but that was not my problem.)
OK:
1. Unstable can sometimes get broken. I accept that.
2. However, libc6 stuff is so critical that any upgrade posted must be
installable and operational. Some folks might not recover.
Then they shouldn't run unstable. :)
Yup. But they already had it installed and running without much ado for ages.
Since the current packages only partially installed last attempt, I am
afraid to upgrade any of this now. What is the status in reality?
Works for me (on amd64). What's your specific problem? Which version are
you on, which do you try to install and how does it fail?
I supposed I could try again. Since I manually dpkg-downgraded to the testing
packages, there should really be no non-dpkg library around. Since I had to
fix this stuff manually a long while back, maybe there was some file I copied
to /lib. Still, should have given me the choice to abort all of it or go
ahead. Worst case would have been no worse.
If it fails to totally install again, I still have the testing packages to
which to downgrade immediately this time. I would only touch the x-stuff if it
succeeds since their dependencies on the libc6 and friends are critical. Or
maybe wait till the next upgrade?
