On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 12:17:03PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> We could always do what redhat has done, and copy the libdb.so.3 from
> the glibc 2.1.3 binaries, and use them in the libdb2 package. That means
> it will work when 2.1.3 is still installed, and before libc6 2.2.x is
> unpacked. The sol
Anthony Towns writes:
> We could also just make the upgrade instructions:
>
> apt-get update
> apt-get install libc6 libdb2
> apt-get install dpkg apt
> apt-get dist-upgrade
This "solution" is not a solution at all; it's an invitation to
disaster. (The other proposed so
Anthony Towns writes:
> Yes, I know. What I was saying was that for apt upgrades, Depends and
> Pre-Depends from essential packages are effectively equivalent. So there
> was probably some other cause to your problem.
Gotcha. What would it be?
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 12:17:03PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> We could always do what redhat has done, and copy the libdb.so.3 from
> the glibc 2.1.3 binaries, and use them in the libdb2 package. That means
> it will work when 2.1.3 is still installed, and before libc6 2.2.x is
> unpacked. The so
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We could also just make the upgrade instructions:
>
> apt-get update
> apt-get install libc6 libdb2
> apt-get install dpkg apt
> apt-get dist-upgrade
This "solution" is not a solution at all; it's an invitation to
disaster. (T
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, I know. What I was saying was that for apt upgrades, Depends and
> Pre-Depends from essential packages are effectively equivalent. So there
> was probably some other cause to your problem.
Gotcha. What would it be?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would be possible to get rid of them in woody by recompiling and
> remove the dependency of libc6 on libdb2 altogether?
It won't really help. It was perl that was broken in the original problem,
which is linked against libdb.so.3 in potato. So if you r
Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would be possible to get rid of them in woody by recompiling and
> remove the dependency of libc6 on libdb2 altogether?
It won't really help. It was perl that was broken in the original problem,
which is linked against libdb.so.3 in potato. So if you
On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Ben Collins wrote:
> The libdb.so.3 in libdb2, that is historic from libc6 2.1.x, is not
> going to be used by newly compiled programs (those compiled against
> libc6 2.2, as opposed to libc6 2.1).
How many packages compiled against the old libdb.so.3 are there?
Would be pos
On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Ben Collins wrote:
> The libdb.so.3 in libdb2, that is historic from libc6 2.1.x, is not
> going to be used by newly compiled programs (those compiled against
> libc6 2.2, as opposed to libc6 2.1).
How many packages compiled against the old libdb.so.3 are there?
Would be po
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 02:04:22AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 11:20:57AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 05:13:17PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > > I wonder why woody's libc6 depends on libdb2 in the first place.
> > > What is the exact nature of t
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 11:20:57AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 05:13:17PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > I wonder why woody's libc6 depends on libdb2 in the first place.
> > What is the exact nature of this dependency?
> I'm looking into a means for ensuring upgrades wiht t
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 05:13:17PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> I wonder why woody's libc6 depends on libdb2 in the first place.
> What is the exact nature of this dependency?
Glibc 2.2.x does not contain the db1/db2 libs that were present in
potato's 2.1.x glibc. So that functionality was mov
On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Aha! More importantly, there's the non-essential, but required and depended
> upon by perl (not perl-base) package libdb2, which doesn't Pre-Depend: on
> libc6.
>
> I think what's happening is that:
>
> /usr/bin/perl (provided by perl-base.deb) is
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 02:04:22AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 11:20:57AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 05:13:17PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > > I wonder why woody's libc6 depends on libdb2 in the first place.
> > > What is the exact nature of
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 11:20:57AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 05:13:17PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > I wonder why woody's libc6 depends on libdb2 in the first place.
> > What is the exact nature of this dependency?
> I'm looking into a means for ensuring upgrades wiht
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 05:13:17PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> I wonder why woody's libc6 depends on libdb2 in the first place.
> What is the exact nature of this dependency?
Glibc 2.2.x does not contain the db1/db2 libs that were present in
potato's 2.1.x glibc. So that functionality was mo
On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Aha! More importantly, there's the non-essential, but required and depended
> upon by perl (not perl-base) package libdb2, which doesn't Pre-Depend: on
> libc6.
>
> I think what's happening is that:
>
> /usr/bin/perl (provided by perl-base.deb) is
On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 09:56:00PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > Are you sure this is the cause of the perl upgrade mess though? Apt tries
> > to immediately configure essential packages wherever possible, afaik, which
> > means Depends: generally end up the same a
Anthony Towns writes:
> Are you sure this is the cause of the perl upgrade mess though? Apt tries
> to immediately configure essential packages wherever possible, afaik, which
> means Depends: generally end up the same as Pre-Depends: anyway, no?
I'm using apt. The log I posted shows apt blowin
On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 09:56:00PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Are you sure this is the cause of the perl upgrade mess though? Apt tries
> > to immediately configure essential packages wherever possible, afaik, which
> > means Depends: general
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Are you sure this is the cause of the perl upgrade mess though? Apt tries
> to immediately configure essential packages wherever possible, afaik, which
> means Depends: generally end up the same as Pre-Depends: anyway, no?
I'm using apt. The log I pos
Anthony Towns wrote:
> Aha! More importantly, there's the non-essential, but required and depended
> upon by perl (not perl-base) package libdb2, which doesn't Pre-Depend: on
> libc6.
Correct.
> I think what's happening is that:
>/usr/bin/perl (provided by perl-base.deb) is essential a
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Aha! More importantly, there's the non-essential, but required and depended
> upon by perl (not perl-base) package libdb2, which doesn't Pre-Depend: on
> libc6.
Correct.
> I think what's happening is that:
>/usr/bin/perl (provided by perl-base
On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 05:26:33PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> There are three other essential packages in unstable which depend on
> libc6 without using a Pre-Depends, namely base-passwd_3.2.1,
> hostname_2.08 and ncurses-bin_5.2.20010318-2.
Aha! More importantly, there's the non-essential, but
On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 05:26:33PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> There are three other essential packages in unstable which depend on
> libc6 without using a Pre-Depends, namely base-passwd_3.2.1,
> hostname_2.08 and ncurses-bin_5.2.20010318-2.
Aha! More importantly, there's the non-essential, bu
On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 05:26:33PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > There are three other essential packages in unstable which depend on
> > libc6 without using a Pre-Depends, namely base-passwd_3.2.1,
> > hostname_2.08 and ncurses-bin_5.2.20010318-2.
> >
On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 05:26:33PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> There are three other essential packages in unstable which depend on
> libc6 without using a Pre-Depends, namely base-passwd_3.2.1,
> hostname_2.08 and ncurses-bin_5.2.20010318-2.
>
> If there are not objections I'm going to report s
On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 05:26:33PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > There are three other essential packages in unstable which depend on
> > libc6 without using a Pre-Depends, namely base-passwd_3.2.1,
> > hostname_2.08 and ncurses-bin_5.2.20010318-2.
>
On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 05:26:33PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> There are three other essential packages in unstable which depend on
> libc6 without using a Pre-Depends, namely base-passwd_3.2.1,
> hostname_2.08 and ncurses-bin_5.2.20010318-2.
>
> If there are not objections I'm going to report
Hello.
There are three other essential packages in unstable which depend on
libc6 without using a Pre-Depends, namely base-passwd_3.2.1,
hostname_2.08 and ncurses-bin_5.2.20010318-2.
If there are not objections I'm going to report serious bugs about them too.
(We don't want another mess like the
Hello.
There are three other essential packages in unstable which depend on
libc6 without using a Pre-Depends, namely base-passwd_3.2.1,
hostname_2.08 and ncurses-bin_5.2.20010318-2.
If there are not objections I'm going to report serious bugs about them too.
(We don't want another mess like the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) wrote:
>Note the actual error above. I'll repeat it for those who skipped by:
>
> perl: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.2' not found (required by
>/lib/libdb.so.3)
Yes, I've reproduced this easily in a chroot before. In fact, IIRC, you
can reproduce it b
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) wrote:
>Note the actual error above. I'll repeat it for those who skipped by:
>
> perl: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.2' not found (required by
>/lib/libdb.so.3)
Yes, I've reproduced this easily in a chroot before. In fact, IIRC, you
can reproduce it
I said:
> * A Depends which should really be a Pre-Depends.
This may be the bug:
Package: perl-base
Version: 5.6.0-21
Essential: yes
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.2.1-2)
This should be a Pre-Depends.
Please report this as a grave bug.
On 21 Jun 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Note the actual error above. I'll repeat it for those who skipped by:
>
> perl: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.2' not found (required by
> /lib/libdb.so.3)
I experienced this some weeks ago, and I'm glad to see a typescript of it.
Possible cause
On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, Mike Renfro wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 08:28:47AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>
> > 5) Perl upgrade blows chunks. Here's what I did (note that this
> >whopping lose happened first, before the items above):
> >
> > a) Repoint servers.list to woody
> > b) apt-g
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 08:28:47AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> 5) Perl upgrade blows chunks. Here's what I did (note that this
>whopping lose happened first, before the items above):
>
> a) Repoint servers.list to woody
> b) apt-get update
> c) apt-get upgrade
We tend to use apt-ge
I said:
> * A Depends which should really be a Pre-Depends.
This may be the bug:
Package: perl-base
Version: 5.6.0-21
Essential: yes
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.2.1-2)
This should be a Pre-Depends.
Please report this as a grave bug.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
On 21 Jun 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Note the actual error above. I'll repeat it for those who skipped by:
>
> perl: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.2' not found (required by /lib/libdb.so.3)
I experienced this some weeks ago, and I'm glad to see a typescript of it.
Possible causes
On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, Mike Renfro wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 08:28:47AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>
> > 5) Perl upgrade blows chunks. Here's what I did (note that this
> >whopping lose happened first, before the items above):
> >
> > a) Repoint servers.list to woody
> > b) apt-
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 08:28:47AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> 5) Perl upgrade blows chunks. Here's what I did (note that this
>whopping lose happened first, before the items above):
>
> a) Repoint servers.list to woody
> b) apt-get update
> c) apt-get upgrade
We tend to use apt-g
42 matches
Mail list logo
