Your message dated Sun, 21 Feb 2016 00:39:35 +0100
with message-id <56c8f937.5020...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: libxine2 Sid upgrade fail: 2 unmet dependencies
has caused the Debian Bug report #800477,
regarding libxine2 Sid upgrade fail: 2 unmet dependencies
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 this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
800477: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=800477
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: libxine2
Version: 1.2.6-1+b4
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
Dear Maintainer,
Dear Maintainer,
This is my very first bug report so please forgive any incidental missteps in
this report. I chose Severity #2 Grave because this bug fits the "renders
package uninstallable" criteria under that severity level. My thought process
is it inhibits the installation of packages that could potentially contain your
most recent security patches.
So what happened was: Today I ran "apt-get update" followed by
"apt-show-versions -u" multiple times as is my daily routine. Results were the
same each time I manually tried to upgrade libxine2 (via "apt-get install").
Its package install/upgrade was unsuccessful and generated the following
informative (snipped for brevity):
libxine2 : Depends: libxine2-plugins (= 1.2.6-1); libxine2-misc-plugins (=
1.2.6-1+b5)
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
On a whim, I tried a backdoor approach via an install attempt of (randomly
chosen) libxine2-x. I immediately aborted that approach upon seeing the
following advisement:
The following packages will be REMOVED:
libxine2 libxine2-misc-plugins libxine2-plugins xine-ui
My approach for now will be to leave the previous libxine2 related packages as
were in anticipation that your Development Team will correct the situation as
soon as Humanly possible.
Thank you so much for the work you do. Xine is one of my relatively few
installed Debian packages hand chosen for being Xfce4 AND user friendly.
PS My presumption is you will not need further input as this particular type of
bug appears to be a regular, accepted occurrence in Unstable. If you do require
further feeback, please note that specifically so that I cognitively grasp that
my part of this process is not complete yet. :)
Cindy Sue Causey
Talking Rock, Georgia, USA
-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 4.1.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=, LC_CTYPE= (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
Versions of packages libxine2 depends on:
ii libxine2-bin 1.2.6-1+b4
ii libxine2-misc-plugins 1.2.6-1+b4
ii libxine2-plugins 1.2.6-1
Versions of packages libxine2 recommends:
ii libxine2-doc [libxine-doc] 1.2.6-1
ii libxine2-ffmpeg 1.2.6-1+b4
Versions of packages libxine2 suggests:
pn gxine <none>
ii xine-ui 0.99.9-1.2
-- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 17:36:39 +0700 Theppitak Karoonboonyanan
<t...@debian.org> wrote:
> I wonder if this bug is still the case. As a user who has blindly pinned
> libxine2 for a long while due to this blocker bug via apt-listbugs without
> having time to check its detail, I have finally tried upgrading it today,
> with success.
>
> Probably, the problem was temporary and has already been fixed?
> If so, it should be closed now, IMO.
My guess is that the initial problem happened during an ongoing
transition and the situation has now cleared (after a few more
transitons). I also don't see any related problems in piuparts.
The +b5 binNMU for amd64 was built 2015-09-28, the bug was reported one
day later mentioning +b4 packages ...
So I'm closing this bug now.
Andreas
--- End Message ---
