On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 09:02:45AM +0100, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Sb, 11 dec 21, 14:44:42, A. F. Cano wrote:
> >
> > After many iterations of installing, autoremoving, updating and
> > upgrading, some packages were installed along with their dependencies,
> > but I'm also getting:
> >
> > E;
On Sb, 11 dec 21, 14:44:42, A. F. Cano wrote:
>
> After many iterations of installing, autoremoving, updating and
> upgrading, some packages were installed along with their dependencies,
> but I'm also getting:
>
> E; Packae '' has no installation candidate
>
> or is alerady the newest version
ng got really messed up during the upgrade. There are broken
> > > > dependencies and some packages (like some vim addon) don't work at all.
> > > > Vim, for instance is unusable.
> > > >
> > > > I have tried all the dpkg/apt/apt-get commands to f
ies and some packages (like some vim addon) don't work at all.
> > > Vim, for instance is unusable.
> > >
> > > I have tried all the dpkg/apt/apt-get commands to fix broken dependencies,
> > > broken packages, etc, and they all return without error now [1], but
> > Vim, for instance is unusable.
> >
> > I have tried all the dpkg/apt/apt-get commands to fix broken dependencies,
> > broken packages, etc, and they all return without error now [1], but
> > aptitude
> > starts "resolving dependencies" and it soon uses up al
ands to fix broken dependencies,
> broken packages, etc, and they all return without error now [1], but aptitude
> starts "resolving dependencies" and it soon uses up all the available RAM,
> then all the available swap and the system slows down (thrashing) and then
> freezes.
D
A. F. Cano wrote:
>
> Something got really messed up during the upgrade. There are broken
> dependencies and some packages (like some vim addon) don't work at all.
> Vim, for instance is unusable.
>
> I have tried all the dpkg/apt/apt-get commands to fix broken dependencies,
Something got really messed up during the upgrade. There are broken
dependencies and some packages (like some vim addon) don't work at all.
Vim, for instance is unusable.
I have tried all the dpkg/apt/apt-get commands to fix broken dependencies,
broken packages, etc, and they all return
On Fri 05 Oct 2018 at 20:31:49 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> On Fri 05 Oct 2018 at 22:36:48 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > On Fri 05 Oct 2018 at 16:17:22 -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Friday, October 05, 2018 03:40:09 PM Brian wrote:
>
> > > > I've lost track. Are you using dist-upgrade on
On 2018-10-05, Brian wrote:
>> I'm not the OP, but the place where I plan to use (apt-get) upgrade and not
>> dist-upgrade is Jessie (Debian 8).
>
> Debian 8 is obsolete; it doesn't even receive security updates.
> dist-upgrade is most unlikely to bring it to its knees.
>
I've never used
On Fri 05 Oct 2018 at 22:36:48 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> On Fri 05 Oct 2018 at 16:17:22 -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, October 05, 2018 03:40:09 PM Brian wrote:
> > > I've lost track. Are you using dist-upgrade on stable or unstable?
> >
> > I'm not the OP, but the place where I
On Fri 05 Oct 2018 at 16:17:22 -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, October 05, 2018 03:40:09 PM Brian wrote:
> > On Fri 05 Oct 2018 at 11:03:31 -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > I'm not sure I know enough to re-phrase the question. I'm also surprised
> > > / confused to see the
On Friday, October 05, 2018 03:40:09 PM Brian wrote:
> On Fri 05 Oct 2018 at 11:03:31 -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I'm not sure I know enough to re-phrase the question. I'm also surprised
> > / confused to see the two tags: "Essential: yes" and "Priority:
> > required" -- I presume that
On Fri 05 Oct 2018 at 11:03:31 -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I'm not sure I know enough to re-phrase the question. I'm also surprised /
> confused to see the two tags: "Essential: yes" and "Priority: required" -- I
> presume that is not redundant information, but at first glance it
On Friday, October 05, 2018 07:25:29 AM Reco wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 07:03:13AM -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Can someone describe (or point to) a description of how dist-upgrade
> > determines the more important app? (Oh, I'm guessing it has to do with
> > the whatever it is
On Fri, 5 Oct 2018 04:57:36 -0500
Richard Owlett wrote:
>
> Can someone point me to a discussion of why one would chose a
> particular option?
>
The important difference is that 'upgrade' (aptitude safe-upgrade) will
not remove a package without replacing it with a more up-to-date
version of
Hi.
On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 07:03:13AM -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, October 05, 2018 06:06:25 AM Reco wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 04:57:36AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
>
> > > Can someone point me to a discussion of why one would chose a particular
> > > option?
Hi.
On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 05:51:09AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > > I'm not comfortable with anything other than "stable".
> > > When moving from one release to the next my custom is to purchase a DVD
> > > set and do a complete fresh install.
> > >
> > > However, I *am* several
On Friday, October 05, 2018 06:06:25 AM Reco wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 04:57:36AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > Can someone point me to a discussion of why one would chose a particular
> > option?
>
> Why do you need a discussion of that if you have apt-get(8)?
>
> upgrade is used to
On 10/05/2018 05:06 AM, Reco wrote:
Hi.
On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 04:57:36AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
On 10/04/2018 11:10 PM, mick crane wrote:
On 2018-10-04 18:27, Glenn English wrote:
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:06 PM Richard Owlett wrote:
Just did a fresh install to another
Hi.
On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 04:57:36AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 10/04/2018 11:10 PM, mick crane wrote:
> > On 2018-10-04 18:27, Glenn English wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:06 PM Richard Owlett wrote:
> > >
> > > > Just did a fresh install to another partition of the
On 10/04/2018 11:10 PM, mick crane wrote:
On 2018-10-04 18:27, Glenn English wrote:
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:06 PM Richard Owlett
wrote:
Just did a fresh install to another partition of the machine on which I
observed the current problem.
Installation was from DVD 1 of Debian 9.1.0
Again
On 2018-10-04 18:27, Glenn English wrote:
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:06 PM Richard Owlett
wrote:
Just did a fresh install to another partition of the machine on which
I
observed the current problem.
Installation was from DVD 1 of Debian 9.1.0
Again LibreOffice Writer would not launch.
On 10/4/18, Glenn English wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:06 PM Richard Owlett wrote:
>
>> Just did a fresh install to another partition of the machine on which I
>> observed the current problem.
>> Installation was from DVD 1 of Debian 9.1.0
>>
>> Again LibreOffice Writer would not launch.
>>
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:06 PM Richard Owlett wrote:
> Just did a fresh install to another partition of the machine on which I
> observed the current problem.
> Installation was from DVD 1 of Debian 9.1.0
>
> Again LibreOffice Writer would not launch.
> Attempted complete removal. This time the
MATE's application menu.
2. I later found a flash drive to which I had installed Debian 8.
The .doc file opened properly there.
Tried to do a complete removal with intention of doing a re-install.
Tried to do the re-install receiving a "fix broken packages" response.
Mind sending the
drive to which I had installed Debian 8.
The .doc file opened properly there.
Tried to do a complete removal with intention of doing a re-install.
Tried to do the re-install receiving a "fix broken packages" response.
Mind sending the package(s) that're causing the conflict?
Murp
Dan Purgert wrote:
> Richard Owlett wrote:
>> I received an email with an attachment in .doc format.
>> I clicked to open with default program - LibreOffice Writer.
>> All I got was a brief display of the LibreOffice flash screen.
>> I tried to open from MATE's Application menu - failed likewise.
hat the *doc wasn't broken-by-design (i.e. one of the various
types of malware that tend to use *doc files, etc.)?
>
> Tried to do a complete removal with intention of doing a re-install.
> Tried to do the re-install receiving a "fix broken packages" response.
Mind sending
of doing a re-install.
Tried to do the re-install receiving a "fix broken packages" response.
Got a failure message:
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
E: Error, pkgProblemResolver::Resolve generated breaks, this may be caused by
held packages.
E: Unable
I try to install something from synaptic, it says
> "you have held broken packages"
> but "apt-mark showhold" and "dpkg --get-selections | grep hold"
> don't show any result.
>
>
> I've tried then to reinstall each of them using aptitude.
> Starting wit
nstall
vlc deinstall
vlc-nox deinstall
when I try to install something from synaptic, it says
"you have held broken packages"
but "apt-mark showhold" and "dpkg --get-selections | grep hold&q
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 04:29:51PM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
I agree with Josh Triplett that autodetection looking only for 'ati'
rather than for the individual modules which 'ati' can implicitly load
is a bug that should be fixed. (The point of doing so - questioned in
the last comment on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 06/28/2014 05:57 AM, Chris Bannister wrote:
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 04:29:51PM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
I agree with Josh Triplett that autodetection looking only for
'ati' rather than for the individual modules which 'ati' can
I don't need xserver-xorg-video-mach64 or xserver-xorg-video-r128
to run X on my machine but xserver-xorg-video-radeon comes bundled with
them and xserver-xorg-video-ati. A little experimentation established
that X works fine without xserver-xorg-video-{mach64,r128} but apt-get
complains about
On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 12:31:38 -0700
Mike McClain mike.j...@nethere.com wrote:
I don't need xserver-xorg-video-mach64 or
xserver-xorg-video-r128 to run X on my machine but
xserver-xorg-video-radeon comes bundled with them and
xserver-xorg-video-ati.
AFAI see, …ati is a dependency pkg that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 06/27/2014 03:31 PM, Mike McClain wrote:
I don't need xserver-xorg-video-mach64 or xserver-xorg-video-r128 to
run X on my machine but xserver-xorg-video-radeon comes bundled with
them and xserver-xorg-video-ati.
What do you mean by comes
On 2014-06-27 21:58 +0200, The Wanderer wrote:
On 06/27/2014 03:31 PM, Mike McClain wrote:
I don't need xserver-xorg-video-mach64 or xserver-xorg-video-r128 to
run X on my machine but xserver-xorg-video-radeon comes bundled with
them and xserver-xorg-video-ati.
What do you mean by comes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 06/27/2014 04:17 PM, Sven Joachim wrote:
On 2014-06-27 21:58 +0200, The Wanderer wrote:
On 06/27/2014 03:31 PM, Mike McClain wrote:
I don't need xserver-xorg-video-mach64 or xserver-xorg-video-r128
to run X on my machine but
Charlie (aries...@skymesh.com.au on 2011-10-30 00:12 +1100):
On Sat, 29 Oct 2011 14:01:16 +0200 Arno Schuring
aelschur...@hotmail.com suggested this:
DMO?
Sorry, silly question, but. what is DMO? Have been googling it
and not getting anywhere, and it's late, or early.
Sorry,
On Sat, 29 Oct 2011 11:32:32 -0400 Tom H tomh0...@gmail.com
suggested this:
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Charlie aries...@skymesh.com.au
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Oct 2011 14:01:16 +0200 Arno Schuring
DMO?
Sorry, silly question, but. what is DMO? Have been googling
it and not
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Charlie aries...@skymesh.com.au
wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 14:25:18 +0200 Arno Schuring
aelschur...@hotmail.com suggested this:
Charlie (aries...@skymesh.com.au on 2011-10-27 16:35 +1100):
libavcodec52:
Depends: libavutil50 (4:0.6.2-99) but
On Sat, 29 Oct 2011 14:01:16 +0200 Arno Schuring
aelschur...@hotmail.com suggested this:
DMO?
Sorry, silly question, but. what is DMO? Have been googling it
and not getting anywhere, and it's late, or early.
Charlie
--
Registered Linux User:- 329524
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Charlie aries...@skymesh.com.au wrote:
On Sat, 29 Oct 2011 14:01:16 +0200 Arno Schuring
DMO?
Sorry, silly question, but. what is DMO? Have been googling it
and not getting anywhere, and it's late, or early.
http://debian-multimedia.org/
--
To
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Charlie aries...@skymesh.com.au wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 14:25:18 +0200 Arno Schuring
aelschur...@hotmail.com suggested this:
Charlie (aries...@skymesh.com.au on 2011-10-27 16:35 +1100):
libavcodec52:
Depends: libavutil50 (4:0.6.2-99) but 5:0.7.1-0.1 is
Charlie (aries...@skymesh.com.au on 2011-10-27 16:35 +1100):
libavcodec52:
Depends: libavutil50 (4:0.6.2-99) but 5:0.7.1-0.1 is to be
installed or libavutil-extra-50 (4:0.6.2-99) but it is not
installable
Do you have debian-multimedia in your sources.list by any chance? Or
have had it?
Charlie aries...@skymesh.com.au writes:
You have libavdevice52 installed and held at version
5:0.6.1+svn20101128-0.2 which is too old.
See your held packages with aptitude search ~ahold. Try removing
your hold with aptitude unhold libavdevice52 and then try
reinstalling xvidcap.
Looking like I
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 14:25:18 +0200 Arno Schuring
aelschur...@hotmail.com suggested this:
Charlie (aries...@skymesh.com.au on 2011-10-27 16:35 +1100):
libavcodec52:
Depends: libavutil50 (4:0.6.2-99) but 5:0.7.1-0.1 is to be
installed or libavutil-extra-50 (4:0.6.2-99) but it is not
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 15:09:14 -0500 Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com
suggested this:
Charlie aries...@skymesh.com.au writes:
You have libavdevice52 installed and held at version
5:0.6.1+svn20101128-0.2 which is too old.
See your held packages with aptitude search ~ahold. Try removing
your hold
[Not Installed]
Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]
So I attempt the install it through synaptic and get this:
Could not apply changes!
Fix broken packages first.
So try with synaptic to fix the broken packages and get this:
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken
broken packages first.
So try with synaptic to fix the broken packages and get this:
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
E: Error, pkgProblemResolver::Resolve generated breaks, this may be
caused by held packages.
E: Unable to correct dependencies
E: Error
Aptitude claims that gvfs, libempathy-gtk28, libempathy30, and
openjdk-6-jre-lib are broken in Sid.
I understand normal Sid churn but these have been broken for a
couple of weeks.
Are they not really broken, just (e.g.) being replaced by something
else with a different name?
Anybody
On 2009-12-23 19:41 +0100, Rick Thomas wrote:
Aptitude claims that gvfs, libempathy-gtk28, libempathy30, and
openjdk-6-jre-lib are broken in Sid.
I understand normal Sid churn but these have been broken for a
couple of weeks.
Are they not really broken, just (e.g.) being replaced by
Rick Thomas wrote:
Aptitude claims that gvfs, libempathy-gtk28, libempathy30, and
openjdk-6-jre-lib are broken in Sid.
I understand normal Sid churn but these have been broken for a couple
of weeks.
Are they not really broken, just (e.g.) being replaced by something
else with a
Hi,
I tried to install a deb package from a website, it only parcially
installed, and now won't remove. I've even tried using the --force
option, it just says I should try reinstalling, but when I do that I get
errors with installations. So how do I remove this package from my
system? Because
Daniel Dalton wrote:
Hi,
I tried to install a deb package from a website, it only parcially
installed, and now won't remove. I've even tried using the --force
option, it just says I should try reinstalling, but when I do that I get
errors with installations. So how do I remove this package
Hello,
You might as well do a simple
aptitude install epiphany-browser
(if my memory doesn't fail, it will warn you about the fact that
epiphany-gecko - and possibly epiphany-extensions-more - will have to
be removed, which is no problem as they are now obsolete).
By the way, is the graphical
JF Pirl wrote:
8
By the way, is the graphical ugliness of some days ago in Sid solved
now? (when logging in, GTK/the gnome-panels seemed to be broken or
something, and some panel applets did not want to work, as well as no
direct shutdown possibilities in the gdm session - I switched
I understand normal sid churn, but usually a problem like this is
fixed in a couple of days. These packages have been broken for well
over a week.So I thought I'd bring the problem to a larger
audience, in hopes that somebody who knows more than I do could give
it some attention.
Rick Thomas wrote:
The following packages are BROKEN:
epiphany-browser epiphany-extensions-more libgnokii4 python-qt4
Hello!
Regarding epiphany:
It seems has something in common with epiphany gecko to webkit
transition. Try installing epiphany-webkit. It should remove obsolete
packages
On Oct 8, 2009, at 3:15 PM, Tomek Kruszona wrote:
Rick Thomas wrote:
The following packages are BROKEN:
epiphany-browser epiphany-extensions-more libgnokii4 python-qt4
Hello!
Regarding epiphany:
It seems has something in common with epiphany gecko to webkit
transition. Try installing
Rick Thomas wrote:
Thanks for the suggestion...
But I think there's something I don't understand...
From the package descriptions, it sounds like the epiphany folks are
headed in the direction of epiphany-browser and away from
epiphany-webkit. Wouldn't installing epiphany-webkit be a step
such thing.
In any case, since then aptitude thinks no packages are broken.
I was wondering, now that I am a bit more comfortable with aptitude, how
do I make it recall that list of broken packages? I wouldn't starting
aptitude all over again (removing and reinstalling?), if I knew the best
way to do
' about those packages and to clear the cache or some such thing.
In any case, since then aptitude thinks no packages are broken.
I was wondering, now that I am a bit more comfortable with aptitude, how
do I make it recall that list of broken packages? I wouldn't starting
aptitude all over
you
can try aptitude upgrade, aptitude dist-upgrade or U + g in
interactive mode. (Remember: aptitude keep-all is your friend when
things get scary.)
To find out if you currently have any broken packages on your system you
can run
aptitude search '~b'
Thanks Florian
This is very useful
, aptitude dist-upgrade or U + g in
interactive mode. (Remember: aptitude keep-all is your friend when
things get scary.)
To find out if you currently have any broken packages on your system you
can run
aptitude search '~b'
I guess that explains it. Thanks a ton for taking the time to explain
all
Am 2006-06-28 02:11:51, schrieb Bill Jones:
On 6/27/06, Chase James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello. I'm trying to upgrade a debian woody box to sarge according to the
release notes. When attempting to install aptitude, I get the following
error:
# apt-get install aptitude
Wierdness...
: libgtk2.0-0 (= 2.8.0) but 2.6.4-3.1 is to be installed
Depends: libxfixes3 but it is not going to be installed
Depends: libxinerama1 but it is not going to be installed
E: Broken packages
Sistemi dist-upgrade yaptığımda problem çıkarmadan testing'e
güncellenebiliyor. Eskiden bu gibi
On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 10:24:22PM -0400, Chase James wrote:
Would changing all mentions of woody to sarge in my apt/sources.list then
doing a dist-upgrade fix the problem:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
aptitude: Depends: libapt-pkg-libc6.2-3-2-3.2
E: Broken packages
for the advice.
Chase
-Original Message-
From: Andrew Sackville-West [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 11:22 PM
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: cannot install aptitude: Broken packages
On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 10:24:22PM -0400, Chase James wrote:
Would
Would changing all mentions of woody to sarge in my apt/sources.list then
doing a dist-upgrade fix the problem:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
aptitude: Depends: libapt-pkg-libc6.2-3-2-3.2
E: Broken packages
I know the Release Notes say to use aptitude, but could I just use
On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 10:24:22PM -0400, Chase James wrote:
Would changing all mentions of woody to sarge in my apt/sources.list then
doing a dist-upgrade fix the problem:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
aptitude: Depends: libapt-pkg-libc6.2-3-2-3.2
E: Broken packages
12:35 PM
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: cannot install aptitude: Broken packages
On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 11:59:29PM -0700, Christopher Nelson wrote:
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 02:11:51AM -0400, Bill Jones wrote:
On 6/27/06, Chase James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello. I'm trying
On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 01:18:57PM -0400 or thereabouts, Chase James wrote:
Andrew,
Yes, I changed every mention of stable to woody so I could upgrade all of my
current woody packages before upgrading to sarge. Then I did apt-get update.
Shouldn't that be 'apt-get dist-upgrade' ?
--
aptitude first will fix my broken
aptitude package, then I'm willing to try it.
-Original Message-
From: Stephen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 2:30 PM
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: cannot install aptitude: Broken packages
On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 01:18
Actually, I already tried dist-upgrading woody and it still gives me the
aptitude broken package error.
-Original Message-
From: Stephen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 2:30 PM
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: cannot install aptitude: Broken packages
On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 02:57:07PM -0400, Chase James wrote:
Actually, I already tried dist-upgrading woody and it still gives me the
aptitude broken package error.
I seem top remember long ago that when I upgraded from woody to sarge I
was to upgrade aptitude first (possibly with perl) and
On 6/27/06, Chase James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello. I'm trying to upgrade a debian woody box to sarge according to the
release notes. When attempting to install aptitude, I get the following
error:
# apt-get install aptitude
Wierdness... Try
apt-get upgrade aptitude
aptitude provides
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 02:11:51AM -0400, Bill Jones wrote:
On 6/27/06, Chase James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello. I'm trying to upgrade a debian woody box to sarge according to the
release notes. When attempting to install aptitude, I get the following
error:
# apt-get install aptitude
On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 11:59:29PM -0700, Christopher Nelson wrote:
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 02:11:51AM -0400, Bill Jones wrote:
On 6/27/06, Chase James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello. I'm trying to upgrade a debian woody box to sarge according to the
release notes. When attempting to
report against
that package should be filed.
The following information may help to resolve the situation:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
aptitude: Depends: libapt-pkg-libc6.2-3-2-3.2
E: Broken packages
Is there any way to repair this? Thanks for any help.
Sincerely,
Chase James
: Broken packages
[~] % sudo apt-get install gstreamer0.10-plugins-good
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
distribution that some
-plugins-good but it is not going to
be installed
E: Broken packages
[~] % sudo apt-get install gstreamer0.10-plugins-good
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible situation
to resolve the situation:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
rhythmbox: Depends: gstreamer0.10-plugins-good but it is not going to
be installed
E: Broken packages
[~] % sudo apt-get install gstreamer0.10-plugins-good
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
On Sunday 25 June 2006 08:43, Wasyl wrote:
Hi,
When i want to install a package often i see such result:
[~] % sudo apt-get install rhythmbox
[~] % sudo apt-get install gstreamer0.10-plugins-good
Both packages can be installed and removed fine. Cannot reproduce your
problem. Using Debian
Missing python-twisted-core upgrade breaks all the other python-twisted
packages.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
be filed.
The following information may help to resolve the situation:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
rhythmbox: Depends: gstreamer0.10-plugins-good but it is not going to
be installed
E: Broken packages
[~] % sudo apt-get install gstreamer0.10-plugins-good
Reading Package Lists
Hi list,
I am running Debian unstable without x, except that some console apps
seem to require some of the x infrastructure. Lately my apt-get upgrade,
dist-upgrade, install, and remove all seem to fail because of a package
or two that are neither fully installed or removed. I can't seem to
* Charles Hallenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-06-14 05:42:43 -0400]:
Try:
apt-get remove --purge X11-common
apt-get dist-upgrade
--
Cheers,
Dave
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Dave,
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 05:02:30PM +0700, Dave Patterson wrote:
* Charles Hallenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-06-14 05:42:43 -0400]:
Try:
apt-get remove --purge X11-common
apt-get dist-upgrade
Here is what happens when I do the remove:
Script started on Wed 14 Jun 2006
Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
Package x11-common is not installed, so not removed
Hmm, you could try `dpkg --purge x11-common`
HTH,
Joris
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 6/14/06, Charles Hallenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Dave,On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 05:02:30PM +0700, Dave Patterson wrote: * Charles Hallenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-06-14 05:42:43 -0400]: Try:
apt-get remove --purge X11-common apt-get dist-upgradeI had a similar problem two days ago
Ok, it looks like x11-common can't do anything because somethings hosed
with debconf.
Try apt-get -f install debconf, or dpkg-reconfigure debconf, and see what
happens there.
--
Cheers,
Dave
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Hi, Joris
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 12:37:17PM +0200, Joris Huizer wrote:
Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
Package x11-common is not installed, so not removed
Hmm, you could try `dpkg --purge x11-common`
Unfortunately I get the same familiar output:
Script started on Wed 14 Jun 2006 06:38:49 AM
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 05:39:07PM +0700, Dave Patterson wrote:
Ok, it looks like x11-common can't do anything because somethings hosed
with debconf.
Try apt-get -f install debconf, or dpkg-reconfigure debconf, and see what
happens there.
The apt-get -f install debconf gives me the same
* Simone Soldateschi [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-06-14 12:36:47 +0200]:
A debian user suggested me to fix the problem using synaptic and filtering
defective packages.. it did the job.
Sorry. Here, he can't do that because he isn't even running X, only some
components of it are needed for his
Hi Simone,
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 12:36:47PM +0200, Simone Soldateschi wrote:
I had a similar problem two days ago trying to update 'libwx2.6-dev' from
backports.
'apt-get' failed package upgrade due to unmet dependencies and I was unable
to fix the problem with 'apt -f install'.
A
Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
Hi, Joris
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 12:37:17PM +0200, Joris Huizer wrote:
Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
Package x11-common is not installed, so not removed
Hmm, you could try `dpkg --purge x11-common`
Unfortunately I get the same familiar output:
Script started on
* Charles Hallenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-06-14 06:50:32 -0400]:
Do I dare try to remove debconf? I better do a backup first, this is
getting serious smile
'Eek!' said I, and yes, do a backup.
Then, yank it out.
Then, pull debconf from the testing
repository manually and install with
Hi Joris,
When I add either the --force-depends or the --force-all option to the
dpkg --purge x11-common command, they also fail to remove the package.
When I then do an apt-get -f install, I get the same familiar failure as
I reported earlier.
I may have to save what I can and reinstall my
1 - 100 of 202 matches
Mail list logo
