Re: dpkg-buildpackage creating uninstallable packages?
On So, 29 Sep 2013, Stephen Kitt wrote: Uninstall the libc6-amd64:i386 package. See http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2013/03/msg00139.html. But watch out for http://bugs.debian.org/699206 - make sure you have a root sash running somewhere so you can relink /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2... Indeed, suddenly my system was hosed ... nothing did run again. Umpf. I managed to get it back without knowing the above bug, but it did cost me some nerves. Sorry, might I ask *why* bugs like this that break *all* other software are tagged as important and open since *January* ??? Norbert PREINING, Norbert http://www.preining.info JAIST, Japan TeX Live Debian Developer DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130930075943.gb17...@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
Re: dpkg-buildpackage creating uninstallable packages?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Norbert Preining prein...@logic.at schrieb: On So, 29 Sep 2013, Stephen Kitt wrote: Uninstall the libc6-amd64:i386 package. See http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2013/03/msg00139.html. But watch out for http://bugs.debian.org/699206 - make sure you have a root sash running somewhere so you can relink /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2... Indeed, suddenly my system was hosed ... nothing did run again. Umpf. I managed to get it back without knowing the above bug, but it did cost me some nerves. Sorry, might I ask *why* bugs like this that break *all* other software are tagged as important and open since *January* ??? Norbert PREINING, Norbert http://www.preining.info JAIST, Japan TeX Live Debian Developer DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094 Simply put: Because you made no effort to fix it :). - -nik - -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: APG v1.0.8-fdroid iQFNBAEBCgA3BQJSST1JMBxEb21pbmlrIEdlb3JnZSAobW9iaWxlIGtleSkgPG5p a0BuYXR1cmFsbmV0LmRlPgAKCRAvLbGk0zMOJQMXB/954UMli1fbKU4qTASJ+mOw 4D7txAdR0MUUgKHrelZeJ4MNPsstOvGybqtd14NdrG0WnCZM3w1hWv9kyYtX76n4 ot7N79zReheZJsSj/uQ0nVjPL6N9nut5ONzd+suLQhThg0dHCzuUiPUC7hPNmKEC h3r7pLw3zw/f8cNAn4QA4XvBfoU2TS5+Il6YZ0ODxGvJE6mdeGYO3SXh09HmkABA Ec1KNDNOs5zOHQjNnb75+9WGZXs/5DJnTDxrMAkPS8qbgSfT+N+RfTU9WBD2f/Wv u2JjbsNWqsDZLkegtKgOsrWuGIA52inSD+jIaXhGPH6Aviv4bcw+5qYdTj8F5jn2 =fgDw -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20155ad1-6366-460d-86da-0388793af...@email.android.com
Re: dpkg-buildpackage creating uninstallable packages?
Hi Dominik, Simply put: Because you made no effort to fix it :). Thanks for the very useful comment. Yes, I care for RC bugs in my own packages ... and that are quite a lot. So no time to fix RC bugs of other maintainers. Norbert PREINING, Norbert http://www.preining.info JAIST, Japan TeX Live Debian Developer DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130930123939.ga25...@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
Re: dpkg-buildpackage creating uninstallable packages?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Norbert Preining prein...@logic.at schrieb: Hi Dominik, Simply put: Because you made no effort to fix it :). Thanks for the very useful comment. Yes, I care for RC bugs in my own packages ... and that are quite a lot. So no time to fix RC bugs of other maintainers. Norbert PREINING, Norbert http://www.preining.info JAIST, Japan TeX Live Debian Developer DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094 Hi Norbert, I do not filter my replies for DDs or Non-DDs. If you accuse everyone else in the community of not caring for something, I accuse you of not noticing it earlier. I am certain everyone here does a great job, so I feel disappointed by such accusations. - -nik - -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: APG v1.0.8-fdroid iQFNBAEBCgA3BQJSSXHtMBxEb21pbmlrIEdlb3JnZSAobW9iaWxlIGtleSkgPG5p a0BuYXR1cmFsbmV0LmRlPgAKCRAvLbGk0zMOJUXwCAC0WiHHGm1MU0pkxiCiXOAh SXxItktOPHms/FTnp+CTxp+ZNwEtfwH59e4UpkFYdUIkiK9uxIwoDXhJ6icY7rV3 H7/IG+Tx/3L8+pSIrMAQEvXcBrscXfKjrQexPHTlO8wgASP0BL3hUq2YHzEn9dRI up13o2LP/lCb4w0dSV4CG9QeBlJuwEteVdNnLw5csnKYhTNWRY+wvPmYJHEiGJit 0olbEUWwqX4JZd+TFmHNnbG2xGqzgOR3EXUQApxkgRpzEL+rdXowZjmmc/AEdXya imT7WL+ckycSLb4dwUMT9B23gQTwqaOdt771e/JEsRYHT1TD2cBh7IJInl5pL2sK =xuJw -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/c8929909-a597-4928-82dd-4f29ae8ce...@email.android.com
Re: dpkg-buildpackage creating uninstallable packages?
severity 699206 serious thanks Hi Dominik, first of all, please stop including all the email and bottom-posting, this is a pain and against usual netiquette. Then ... On Mo, 30 Sep 2013, Dominik George wrote: If you accuse everyone else in the community [...] I did not accuse anyone, I asked why a RC bug is tagged as important and not as RC, and why there is no activity since month, although easily reproducible. Anyway, I have raised the severity of this bug. Removing a package must not leave the system in an non-operable state. Norbert PREINING, Norbert http://www.preining.info JAIST, Japan TeX Live Debian Developer DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130930155031.ga30...@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
Re: dpkg-buildpackage creating uninstallable packages?
Hi everyone, second try, with more data .. default package texinfo, I am importing a new upstream into my git, no changes to debian/rules or debian/control, rebuild. From the debian/control: .. Package: info ... Architecture: any Multi-Arch: foreign ... After building the package looks like: info_5.2.0.dfsg.1-1_amd64.deb: new debian package, version 2.0. Version: 5.2.0.dfsg.1-1 Architecture: amd64 Maintainer: Debian TeX maintainers debian-tex-ma...@lists.debian.org Installed-Size: 451 Depends: libc6-amd64 (= 2.15), libtinfo5, install-info ... -- When installing the just built deb on my machine for testing I get: dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of info: info depends on libc6-amd64 (= 2.15). For completeness, I am on amd64, and on uptodate sid. $ dpkg --print-architecture amd64 $ dpkg -l libc6-amd64 ii libc6-amd642.17-93 i386 Embedded GNU C Library: 64bit S.. $ apt-cache policy libc6-amd64 libc6-amd64:i386: Installed: 2.17-93 Candidate: 2.17-93 Version table: *** 2.17-93 0 500 http://ftp2.jp.debian.org/debian/ sid/main i386 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status What is going wrong here? Norbert PREINING, Norbert http://www.preining.info JAIST, Japan TeX Live Debian Developer DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130929064022.ga11...@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
Re: dpkg-buildpackage creating uninstallable packages?
On 2013-09-28 22:18 +0200, Norbert Preining wrote: since a short time when I build a binary package on my running system, I cannot install the created .deb anymore because it depends on libc-amd64 (= some.version) which somehow is not what I have although I am running amd64 sid. Uninstall the libc6-amd64:i386 package. See http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2013/03/msg00139.html. Cheers, Sven -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87eh88nmg3@turtle.gmx.de
Re: dpkg-buildpackage creating uninstallable packages?
On 29-09-13 08:40, Norbert Preining wrote: What is going wrong here? For whatever reason, the amd64 build is picking up i386 paths. I don't know how that happens, except that I expect it is some multi-arch twitch. I recommend you build your packages in a chroot to avoid this (an other) issues. I use pbuilder for all my builds, but other solutions exist. Paul signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: dpkg-buildpackage creating uninstallable packages?
On Sun, 29 Sep 2013 08:58:36 +0200, Sven Joachim svenj...@gmx.de wrote: On 2013-09-28 22:18 +0200, Norbert Preining wrote: since a short time when I build a binary package on my running system, I cannot install the created .deb anymore because it depends on libc-amd64 (= some.version) which somehow is not what I have although I am running amd64 sid. Uninstall the libc6-amd64:i386 package. See http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2013/03/msg00139.html. But watch out for http://bugs.debian.org/699206 - make sure you have a root sash running somewhere so you can relink /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2... Regards, Stephen signature.asc Description: PGP signature
dpkg-buildpackage creating uninstallable packages?
Hi everyone, since a short time when I build a binary package on my running system, I cannot install the created .deb anymore because it depends on libc-amd64 (= some.version) which somehow is not what I have although I am running amd64 sid. Any suggestions? Thanks Norbert PREINING, Norbert http://www.preining.info JAIST, Japan TeX Live Debian Developer DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
Re: dpkg-buildpackage creating uninstallable packages?
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 12:18:03AM +0400, Norbert Preining wrote: since a short time when I build a binary package on my running system, I cannot install the created .deb anymore because it depends on libc-amd64 (= some.version) which somehow is not what I have although I am running amd64 sid. You need to provide more data. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: Digital signature
