subject:"alsa\-base"

On Du, 02 sep 12, 16:42:30, lee wrote:
 The Wanderer wande...@fastmail.fm writes:
 
  No. sid is the permanent name of *un*stable. Current stable is named 
  squeeze.
 
 Ah ok --- I'm bad with remembering names and stopped caring about how
 the releases are called a long time ago. It would explain the attempt to
 downgrade. I'm surprised that there are so many packages from unstable
 installed, though. Yet that will fix itself over time when the packages
 now in unstable make it into testing, I guess.

This will not happen until after the release. Testing is frozen, which 
means only packages fixing release critical bugs will migrate to testing 
and only with the Release Team's approval.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Alsa-Base breaks Linux-Sound-Base

2012-09-03 Thread Chris Bannister

On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 12:06:30PM -0500, Charles Kroeger wrote:
 On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 17:50:02 +0200
 Camaleón noela...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  I experienced no issues with the dist-upgrade.
 
 In my troubles with that I'm sure they installed alsa-base with everything 
 muted.

I think I remember reading somewhere that the reason why everything was
muted was so that there were no unpleasant surprises, i.e. you had to
actually explicitly unmute it and therefore set the volume control to
your own choosing. 

Consider the situation where everything was not muted, then what volume
setting would be appropriate? Too high -- ears blasted, bugreports! Too
low -- hard to hear, bugreports!

Therefore, the best option, to leave it muted, was taken in my view.

-- 
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the 
oppressing. --- Malcolm X


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120903081028.GD25171@tal

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

2012-09-03 Thread Chris Bannister

On Sun, Sep 02, 2012 at 07:31:02PM +0200, lee wrote:
 packages from these when needed? And if I removed Debian multimedia, I
 would miss a lot of packages. 

You might be suprised. The Debian Multimedia team is constantly
improving Debian's multimedia support.

-- 
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the 
oppressing. --- Malcolm X


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120903115826.GI25171@tal

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com writes:

 On Du, 02 sep 12, 16:42:30, lee wrote:
 downgrade. I'm surprised that there are so many packages from unstable
 installed, though. Yet that will fix itself over time when the packages
 now in unstable make it into testing, I guess.

 This will not happen until after the release. Testing is frozen, which 
 means only packages fixing release critical bugs will migrate to testing 
 and only with the Release Team's approval.

Does this cause problems? There's probably a good reason for all the
packages from unstable to be installed since aptitude doesn't install
packages from unstable just randomly.

I wish there was a good way to keep track of all these changes ... The
admin would enter why some change was performed, and the package
management would record in detail what changes were made for this, and
then we could simply produce a list of what changes were made when and
why. Maybe we could even roll back to a previous state easily by simply
undoing the changes that were made. For example, downgrading from the
not fully working NVIDIA drivers took several hours because it was
rather difficult to figure out what needed to be done for that while it
should have been a simple and trivial thing to do.


For now, I removed linux-sound-base which triggered the removal of
alsa-base, upgraded the packages that were pending and re-installed
alsa-base. Perhaps I still have sound after the next reboot ...


-- 
Debian testing amd64


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87pq63p7xg@yun.yagibdah.de

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

2012-09-03 Thread Camaleón

On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 19:31:02 +0200, lee wrote:

 Camaleón noela...@gmail.com writes:
 
 Some packages currently installed may be from unstable or experimental
 because I needed more recent versions of them --- IIRC, the mumble
 ones are. I would want to keep those until testing catches up.

 Then this can be the culprit for all your mess unless you had configure
 apt repositories priorities properly.
 
 What's wrong with it? Aptitude installs packages from testing by default
 and installs packages from unstable or experimental when I tell it to,
 which is what I want.

Nothing wrong per se but when using such mixed repositories you have to 
carefully watch for what gets installed/updated, from where it comes and 
if the update routine is finally doing what you wanted to do. In brief, 
you have to be very cautious or your system can badly break.

 ,
 | lee@yun:~$ LANG=C apt-cache policy

 (...)

 What the hell is all that bunch of repositories? :-O

 You need an urgent reorganization for your repos and also reducing the
 number of them as you have too many defined.
 
 Why? 

To avoid your system from trying to downgrade a bunch of core 
packages? ;-)

 If I was to remove unstable and experimental, how would I install
 packages from these when needed? 

You can't but then you have to know how proceed under this scenario. I 
mean, having a complete mix of stable/testing/unstable/experimental and 
external repositories is not for beginners: you have to understand in 
deep how this works.

 And if I removed Debian multimedia, I would miss a lot of packages.

Sure, such is life :-)

Or you can also cherry pick some packages from d-m and then turn off 
this repository from your sources.list.

 Perhaps I don't need the security updates because there aren't any for
 testing, but they don't seem to hurt anything.

Security updates is one of the repos I would leave. But I'm afraid I have 
a completely point of view than yours about how to use a system, I mean, 
I prefer stability over new features and you seem to look for the 
opposite. Anyway, if that's your case, I would simply install sid and 
problem solved :-)

 While (unsuccessfully) trying to use more recent NVIDIA drivers
 because with the ones from testing the X-session randomly froze, I
 added the i386 architecture because that was recommended. I'm not so
 sure if that was a good idea ... Fortunately, the freezing problem
 seems to have been fixed :)

 At a high cost, I'd say...
 
 Well, what do you do when your X-session randomly freezes? 

Report it? What is for sure is that I'm not going to sacrifice my whole 
system stability for a VGA problem.

 You have two choices: 

(...)

Or maybe more, but this thread is not about this. I would suggest that 
you open a new one if you want to explain these problems in detail or if 
you're still concerned about your available options.

 When using the packet management means high cost, what else do you
 suggest to use?

Using the package manager is not the problem here. The problem is mixing 
all Debian flavours and think this is going to magically work with no 
additional tweaks ;-)

 BTW, what is the Debian way of specifying different locales for
 different users?

 That will depend on the DE you're on (or if you're on none). There's
 more info on locales here:

 http://wiki.debian.org/Locale
 
 Given that a little less than 6.5% of the installed packages are not
 from testing, about 93% of the wiki page applies ;) 

Why not? You only have to read more sections, that's all :-)

 It doesn't tell me how to set it for individual users, though. I guess
 it needs to go into ~/.bashrc. That may not be enough, I'll have to
 see ...

That's an option. But locale settings are also set by the DE and take 
place for every user, so this is another option.

Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/k22cm0$vnl$4...@ger.gmane.org

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

On Lu, 03 sep 12, 15:11:55, lee wrote:
 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com writes:
 
  On Du, 02 sep 12, 16:42:30, lee wrote:
  downgrade. I'm surprised that there are so many packages from unstable
  installed, though. Yet that will fix itself over time when the packages
  now in unstable make it into testing, I guess.
 
  This will not happen until after the release. Testing is frozen, which 
  means only packages fixing release critical bugs will migrate to testing 
  and only with the Release Team's approval.
 
 Does this cause problems? There's probably a good reason for all the
 packages from unstable to be installed since aptitude doesn't install
 packages from unstable just randomly.
 
 I wish there was a good way to keep track of all these changes ... The
 admin would enter why some change was performed, and the package

This is your responsibility as the administrator of your system. There 
are various methods to do it, it all depends on preferences.

 management would record in detail what changes were made for this, and

This information is already provided in the logs.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

Camaleón noela...@gmail.com writes:

 On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 19:31:02 +0200, lee wrote:

 Camaleón noela...@gmail.com writes:
 
 Some packages currently installed may be from unstable or experimental
 because I needed more recent versions of them --- IIRC, the mumble
 ones are. I would want to keep those until testing catches up.

 Then this can be the culprit for all your mess unless you had configure
 apt repositories priorities properly.
 
 What's wrong with it? Aptitude installs packages from testing by default
 and installs packages from unstable or experimental when I tell it to,
 which is what I want.

 Nothing wrong per se but when using such mixed repositories you have to 
 carefully watch for what gets installed/updated, from where it comes and 
 if the update routine is finally doing what you wanted to do. In brief, 
 you have to be very cautious or your system can badly break.

I'm paying attention to that in any case. It's pretty easy, I just look
at what aptitude would do, and if I don't like it, I don't let it do
what it wants. I don't override dependencies and only install software
that isn't in either Debian or Debian-multimedia when it really cannot
be avoided.

If package maintainers set up dependencies in such a way that stuff
installs flawlessly and then something breaks, I'll have a
problem. There probably isn't any good way to prevent that, other than
building everything from scratch, which would involve to take care of
all dependencies myself. That would probably be worse.

And what is worse? Having to wait until a bugfix finally makes it into a
Debian package that is in stable (or testing) or use a Debian package
from unstable or, if that cannot be avoided, from experimental --- or
ignore the package management and get the source and compile and install
yourself whatever you need?

 ,
 | lee@yun:~$ LANG=C apt-cache policy

 (...)

 What the hell is all that bunch of repositories? :-O

 You need an urgent reorganization for your repos and also reducing the
 number of them as you have too many defined.
 
 Why? 

 To avoid your system from trying to downgrade a bunch of core 
 packages? ;-)

Aptitude doesn't try that. If I removed unstable and experimental, what
other choice would there be but to downgrade packages, leaving me with
some stuff not working since packages from unstable are installed
*because* there have been bugfixes?

Maybe I don't understand the problem, so let's take the mumble server
for an example: There was a regular update to it in testing, and that
version didn't work at all. There was a bug report about it and the bug
was fixed in the next version, and that version was available in
unstable, so I installed the version from unstable and it works
fine. What's the problem, and what's a better alternative?

 If I was to remove unstable and experimental, how would I install
 packages from these when needed? 

 You can't but then you have to know how proceed under this scenario. I 
 mean, having a complete mix of stable/testing/unstable/experimental and 
 external repositories is not for beginners: you have to understand in 
 deep how this works.

Well, I haven't installed packages from stable. I have installed
mumble-server from unstable, and I tried NVIDIA drivers from unstable
and experimental and went back to the ones in testing. That's all I did,
besides having a current git version of emacs24 (because there have been
fixes to gnus which aren't available in Debian yet) in /usr/local and a
couple libraries (which are needed by some software I'm using), all of
which the package management doesn't know about at all.

So when the package management figures that it needs to install package
X, Y and K when I install package Z from unstable (because I need the
more recent version of Z) and I let it do that, is there something wrong
with that? Of course, any of the packages X, Y, K and Z from unstable
could be worse than the same packages in testing. There isn't anything I
could do about that, though. The alternative is getting the upstream
sources of what's in package Z and make my own version, completely
ignoring any dependencies which might be important. Is that the better
choice? And if it is and when I do that, I need to somehow keep track of
such software and either have to revert to the Debian versions of the
software once a more recent version is available or update from upstream
or just leave it until it quits working for some reason. That doesn't
seem to be a good choice to me.

Having some packages from unstable installed along with the ones from
testing is a situation that will fix itself over time when more recent
versions of these packages make it into testing, replacing the ones from
unstable. In the meantime, I have a working system without having to
worry about keeping track of self-installed software and dependency
problems that might arise from it. Just don't circumvent the package
management --- I tried that many years ago and found out it's a very

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

Chris Bannister cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz writes:

 On Sun, Sep 02, 2012 at 07:31:02PM +0200, lee wrote:
 packages from these when needed? And if I removed Debian multimedia, I
 would miss a lot of packages. 

 You might be suprised. The Debian Multimedia team is constantly
 improving Debian's multimedia support.

Ok, how do I find out which packages from Debian-MM are actually
installed and what their Debian-MM-team replacements are?


-- 
Debian testing amd64


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87zk57nq3i@yun.yagibdah.de

keeping track of software changes (Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base)

Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com writes:

 On Lu, 03 sep 12, 15:11:55, lee wrote:
 I wish there was a good way to keep track of all these changes ... The
 admin would enter why some change was performed, and the package

 This is your responsibility as the administrator of your system. There 
 are various methods to do it, it all depends on preferences.

Interesting, which methods are there?

 management would record in detail what changes were made for this, and

 This information is already provided in the logs.

True, I never looked at these logs ...


-- 
Debian testing amd64


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87627vnix5.fsf...@yun.yagibdah.de

Re: keeping track of software changes (Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base)

On Lu, 03 sep 12, 18:57:26, lee wrote:
 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com writes:
 
  This is your responsibility as the administrator of your system. 
  There are various methods to do it, it all depends on preferences.
 
 Interesting, which methods are there?

Since you only install select packages from unstable you can (ab)use the 
apt preferences file. Don't set any priority for testing (or stable if 
you have it in sources.list, don't remember if you do), so they will get 
priority 500. Then write something like this in /etc/apt/preferences

Package: *
Pin: release a=unstable
Pin-Priority: 1
Explanation: don't auto-install packages from unstable

Package: my-unstable-package
Pin: version 1.2.3
Pin-Priority: 500
Explanation: fixes troubles with setting foo

As long as the priority is the same as testing 'apt-get upgrade' will 
pull the version from unstable (because it's higher). Because the pin is 
by version and same priority as testing this is basically 
fire-and-forget, because:

- a newer package in unstable will not be installed (pin doesn't match)
- a newer package in testing will be installed without interaction 
  (higher version)

The above is an untested ideea I just had, so it will probably need some 
refining (e.g. I have no ideea what 'apt-get upgrade' will do about a 
package's dependencies), but this should get you started.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

2012-09-03 Thread Camaleón

On Mon, 03 Sep 2012 18:20:35 +0200, lee wrote:

 Camaleón noela...@gmail.com writes:

(...)

 What's wrong with it? Aptitude installs packages from testing by
 default and installs packages from unstable or experimental when I
 tell it to, which is what I want.

 Nothing wrong per se but when using such mixed repositories you have
 to carefully watch for what gets installed/updated, from where it comes
 and if the update routine is finally doing what you wanted to do. In
 brief, you have to be very cautious or your system can badly break.
 
 I'm paying attention to that in any case. It's pretty easy, I just look
 at what aptitude would do, and if I don't like it, I don't let it do
 what it wants. I don't override dependencies and only install software
 that isn't in either Debian or Debian-multimedia when it really cannot
 be avoided.

It hasn't to be that easy given that you were not able to update your 
system (hope you remember there were 148 packages that wanted to change -
ahem... downgrade- their version :-) )

 If package maintainers set up dependencies in such a way that stuff
 installs flawlessly and then something breaks, I'll have a problem.
 There probably isn't any good way to prevent that, other than building
 everything from scratch, which would involve to take care of all
 dependencies myself. That would probably be worse.

I dont't think that's the case. Dependencies are established as they 
should for every Debian flavor, but as you may know, it's up to the user 
having to deal with priorities when the updater routine is doing what you 
have instructed to do (if you're in disagreement with the apt proposal 
then you will have to manually make your own changes and take your own 
decisions on how to proceed -what to keep/what to change).

 And what is worse? Having to wait until a bugfix finally makes it into a
 Debian package that is in stable (or testing) or use a Debian package
 from unstable or, if that cannot be avoided, from experimental --- or
 ignore the package management and get the source and compile and install
 yourself whatever you need?

I think you still don't understand what Debian releases are for: you 
simply can't have the four branches (stable/testing/sid/experimental)  
enabled by default and wait for the updater do its job automagically. I 
have little experience with mixing the 4 branches but I do know that this 
is not going to work unless I put something on my part.

Should I need the most updated versions of the packages I'd go for a pure 
Sid installation. Period.

 You need an urgent reorganization for your repos and also reducing
 the number of them as you have too many defined.
 
 Why?

 To avoid your system from trying to downgrade a bunch of core packages?
 ;-)
 
 Aptitude doesn't try that. If I removed unstable and experimental, what
 other choice would there be but to downgrade packages, leaving me with
 some stuff not working since packages from unstable are installed
 *because* there have been bugfixes?

I can't really tell what would be the best option for you with your 
current system, it's too messed.

 Maybe I don't understand the problem, so let's take the mumble server
 for an example: 

(...)

Okay, but not here, you better open a new thread, please.

 If I was to remove unstable and experimental, how would I install
 packages from these when needed?

 You can't but then you have to know how proceed under this scenario. I
 mean, having a complete mix of stable/testing/unstable/experimental and
 external repositories is not for beginners: you have to understand in
 deep how this works.
 
 Well, I haven't installed packages from stable. 

(...)

That's irrelevant for the matter. The problem was there were hundred 
packages that were marked to be downgraded... you have to deal with/solve 
that.
 
 Having some packages from unstable installed along with the ones from
 testing is a situation that will fix itself over time when more recent
 versions of these packages make it into testing, replacing the ones from
 unstable. 

Or not... remember that the testing branch is not a true rolling 
distribution like Sid is (testing is now frozen and is not going to 
receive many upgrades).

 In the meantime, I have a working system without having to worry about
 keeping track of self-installed software and dependency problems that
 might arise from it. Just don't circumvent the package management --- I
 tried that many years ago and found out it's a very bad idea, so I
 don't do that.

So now what? How are you dealing with your apt problem?

 And if I removed Debian multimedia, I would miss a lot of packages.

 Sure, such is life :-)

 Or you can also cherry pick some packages from d-m and then turn off
 this repository from your sources.list.
 
 And turn it back on every time I check for updates? 

Yes, that way you'll never take a bad step.

 Or skip the updates and only turn it back on when dependency problems
 come up because the cherry-picked packages have

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

On Lu, 03 sep 12, 17:45:11, Camaleón wrote:
 
 I think you still don't understand what Debian releases are for: you 
 simply can't have the four branches (stable/testing/sid/experimental)  
 enabled by default and wait for the updater do its job automagically. I 
 have little experience with mixing the 4 branches but I do know that this 
 is not going to work unless I put something on my part.

Without any pinning this would result in running unstable ;)
 
 Should I need the most updated versions of the packages I'd go for a pure 
 Sid installation. Period.

+1

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

On Lu, 03 sep 12, 16:22:25, lee wrote:
 
 Ok, how do I find out which packages from Debian-MM are actually
 installed and what their Debian-MM-team replacements are?

aptitude search ~S~i~OMultimedia

Will show you which packages you have from deb-multimedia.org. However, 
the Debian replacements only differ in version and because dmo packages 
are using epochs apt will treat them as downgrades :(

I used aptitude's interactive mode to force installation of the debian 
version and then pinned dmo to 100 to prevent automatic installations 
from it, but still allow upgrades of installed packages (same as 
backports).

You can also replace the 'search' above with 'purge' (or 'remove'), 
remove dmo from sources.list (or pin it to 100) and then install the 
packages you need. This time they will be pulled from Debian 
repositories.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com writes:

 On Lu, 03 sep 12, 16:22:25, lee wrote:
 
 Ok, how do I find out which packages from Debian-MM are actually
 installed and what their Debian-MM-team replacements are?

 aptitude search ~S~i~OMultimedia

 Will show you which packages you have from deb-multimedia.org.

Cool :) That lists 58 packages, not all of which are available in
Debian.

 However, the Debian replacements only differ in version and because
 dmo packages are using epochs apt will treat them as downgrades :(

When they are only different in version, then what is bad about having
packages from Debian-multimedia, and why should I remove them?

 I used aptitude's interactive mode to force installation of the debian 
 version and then pinned dmo to 100 to prevent automatic installations 
 from it, but still allow upgrades of installed packages (same as 
 backports).

 You can also replace the 'search' above with 'purge' (or 'remove'), 
 remove dmo from sources.list (or pin it to 100) and then install the 
 packages you need. This time they will be pulled from Debian 
 repositories.

And how about the ones that aren't available in Debian?


-- 
Debian testing amd64


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87d322mk09@yun.yagibdah.de

Re: keeping track of software changes (Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base)

Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com writes:

 On Lu, 03 sep 12, 18:57:26, lee wrote:
 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com writes:
 
  This is your responsibility as the administrator of your system. 
  There are various methods to do it, it all depends on preferences.
 
 Interesting, which methods are there?

 Since you only install select packages from unstable you can (ab)use the 
 apt preferences file. Don't set any priority for testing (or stable if 
 you have it in sources.list, don't remember if you do), so they will get 
 priority 500. Then write something like this in /etc/apt/preferences

 Package: *
 Pin: release a=unstable
 Pin-Priority: 1
 Explanation: don't auto-install packages from unstable

 Package: my-unstable-package
 Pin: version 1.2.3
 Pin-Priority: 500
 Explanation: fixes troubles with setting foo

 As long as the priority is the same as testing 'apt-get upgrade' will 
 pull the version from unstable (because it's higher). Because the pin is 
 by version and same priority as testing this is basically 
 fire-and-forget, because:

 - a newer package in unstable will not be installed (pin doesn't match)
 - a newer package in testing will be installed without interaction 
   (higher version)

That should work nicely, though it's not what I had in mind. I'm
thinking more about being asked when upgrading or installing or removing
packages to enter a reason, like trying NVIDIA drivers from unstable
or reverting to NVIDIA drivers from testing or regular upgrade or
package XYZ isn't needed anymore, etc.. The package management would
then record what it actually does and be able to show me a list of these
entries I can browse, and when I select one of these entries, it would
show me what actions were performed, like installed ABC from testing
or removed XYZ from unstable. It would also offer a search feature
helping me to find out why a particular package is installed, so when
I'd see a particular package installed, it would search through the
records and list the entries in which the package shows up. Then I could
easily see, for example, that package ia32-libs from experimental was
installed when I tried out the NVIDIA drivers from there.

Then, for example, if there was a problem, I might look at the records
and find out that I have a package from experimental or unstable
installed and could tell the package management to replace it with the
package from testing, which might solve the problem.


The only thing I've had in /etc/apt/preferences.d is an entry to
downgrade the the NVIDIA drivers. Aptitude always picks packages from
testing, and it doesn't downgrade packages without being forced to do so
by entries in /etc/apt/preferences.d. If I wanted to install NVIDIA
drivers from unstable, I'd just run aptitude -t unstable nvidia-glx to
force it to use the version that's in unstable.

Keeping track of changes is a very different issue.


-- 
Debian testing amd64


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87haremlux@yun.yagibdah.de

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

2012-09-02 Thread Andrei POPESCU

On Du, 02 sep 12, 07:28:23, lee wrote:
 
 ,
 | lee@yun:~$ aptitude show alsa-base
 | Paket: alsa-base
 | Zustand: Installiert
 | Automatisch installiert: nein
 | Version: 1.0.23+dfsg-4

At least the .at. mirror has 1.0.25+2+nmu2 for wheezy.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com writes:

 On Du, 02 sep 12, 07:28:23, lee wrote:
 
 ,
 | lee@yun:~$ aptitude show alsa-base
 | Paket: alsa-base
 | Zustand: Installiert
 | Automatisch installiert: nein
 | Version: 1.0.23+dfsg-4

 At least the .at. mirror has 1.0.25+2+nmu2 for wheezy.

That version is available and not installed because of the dependency
problem ...


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87pq645320@yun.yagibdah.de

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

Mark Allums m...@allums.com writes:

On 9/2/2012 12:44 AM, lee wrote:
Camaleón noela...@gmail.com writes:

On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 09:38:42 +0200, lee wrote:

Camaleón noela...@gmail.com writes:

http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/a/alsa-base/alsa-base_1.0.25+2+nmu1/changelog

(...)

According to aptitude, alsa-base depends on linux-sound-base and
conflicts with linux-sound-base. So you either have to remove both of
them or keep their current versions.

I don't know how you reached that conflict. I'm running wheezy and dist-
upgrade did a good job by deleting linux-sound-base.

Also, the linux-sound-base dependency should not exist:

http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/alsa-base

So am I supposed to report this problem against alsa-base as a problem
of broken dependencies? Or should I remove both packages and
(forcefully) re-install alsa-base in case I don't have sound anymore
afterwards?

How did you circumvent the problem?

Please run apt-get update apt-get -V dist-upgrade and put here the
output (and don't do the upgrade yet).

See below: that would remove linux-sound-base, upgrade 52 packages and
downgrade 148 packages.

What's with all these downgrades Aptitude doesn't want to do these
downgrades and would upgrade 52 packages and remove alsa-base.

Now I could remove linux-sound-base, that would remove alsa-base as well
due to dependencies. Then I guess I could install alsa-base again and
see what happens. What would I do if sound won't work anymore after
that? Perhaps I become unable to re-install alsa-base because it might
still depend on linux-sound-base?

I took the plunge and let it happen, and I still have sound. YMMV.

At least it's a possibility --- let's see if someone has any ideas,
especially as to what is up with all the downgrades ...

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ligs52xv@yun.yagibdah.de

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

2012-09-02 Thread Andrei POPESCU

On Du, 02 sep 12, 07:44:07, lee wrote:
 
 See below: that would remove linux-sound-base, upgrade 52 packages and
 downgrade 148 packages.

I picked a few of the to-be-downgraded packages and all of them were 
from sid. Do you want to run sid or wheezy? There is at least one 
(vsftpd) which I don't think will migrate to wheezy due to the freeze, 
so you'll have to choose.

Please post also the output of 'LANG=C apt-cache policy' so we can see 
how your system is configured. The 'LANG=C' part is to get English 
output as I assume most readers here don't understand German ;)

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com writes:

 On Du, 02 sep 12, 07:44:07, lee wrote:
 
 See below: that would remove linux-sound-base, upgrade 52 packages and
 downgrade 148 packages.

 I picked a few of the to-be-downgraded packages and all of them were 
 from sid. Do you want to run sid or wheezy?

Sid is stable? I want to run testing and not stable, and shouldn't the
packages in testing not be newer than the ones in Sid? And if the
packages in testing should be more recent than the ones in stable, then
why downgrade them to older versions?

Some packages currently installed may be from unstable or experimental
because I needed more recent versions of them --- IIRC, the mumble ones
are. I would want to keep those until testing catches up.

 There is at least one 
 (vsftpd) which I don't think will migrate to wheezy due to the freeze, 
 so you'll have to choose.

That one I could remove because it isn't used atm.

 Please post also the output of 'LANG=C apt-cache policy' so we can see 
 how your system is configured.

,
| lee@yun:~$ LANG=C apt-cache policy
| Package files:
|  100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
|  release a=now
| 1 http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates/non-free i386 Packages
|  release o=Debian,a=testing,n=wheezy,l=Debian-Security,c=non-free
|  origin security.debian.org
| 1 http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates/contrib i386 Packages
|  release o=Debian,a=testing,n=wheezy,l=Debian-Security,c=contrib
|  origin security.debian.org
| 1 http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates/main i386 Packages
|  release o=Debian,a=testing,n=wheezy,l=Debian-Security,c=main
|  origin security.debian.org
| 1 http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates/non-free amd64 Packages
|  release o=Debian,a=testing,n=wheezy,l=Debian-Security,c=non-free
|  origin security.debian.org
| 1 http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates/contrib amd64 Packages
|  release o=Debian,a=testing,n=wheezy,l=Debian-Security,c=contrib
|  origin security.debian.org
| 1 http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates/main amd64 Packages
|  release o=Debian,a=testing,n=wheezy,l=Debian-Security,c=main
|  origin security.debian.org
|  500 ftp://ftp.deb-multimedia.org/ unstable/main i386 Packages
|  release v=None,o=Unofficial Multimedia 
Packages,a=unstable,n=sid,l=Unofficial Multimedia Packages,c=main
|  origin ftp.deb-multimedia.org
|  500 ftp://ftp.deb-multimedia.org/ unstable/main amd64 Packages
|  release v=None,o=Unofficial Multimedia 
Packages,a=unstable,n=sid,l=Unofficial Multimedia Packages,c=main
|  origin ftp.deb-multimedia.org
|1 ftp://ftp.deb-multimedia.org/ experimental/main i386 Packages
|  release v=None,o=Unofficial Multimedia 
Packages,a=experimental,n=experimental,l=Unofficial Multimedia Packages,c=main
|  origin ftp.deb-multimedia.org
|1 ftp://ftp.deb-multimedia.org/ experimental/main amd64 Packages
|  release v=None,o=Unofficial Multimedia 
Packages,a=experimental,n=experimental,l=Unofficial Multimedia Packages,c=main
|  origin ftp.deb-multimedia.org
| 1 ftp://ftp.deb-multimedia.org/ testing/main i386 Packages
|  release v=None,o=Unofficial Multimedia 
Packages,a=testing,n=wheezy,l=Unofficial Multimedia Packages,c=main
|  origin ftp.deb-multimedia.org
| 1 ftp://ftp.deb-multimedia.org/ testing/main amd64 Packages
|  release v=None,o=Unofficial Multimedia 
Packages,a=testing,n=wheezy,l=Unofficial Multimedia Packages,c=main
|  origin ftp.deb-multimedia.org
|  500 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ stable/main Translation-de
|  500 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ stable/non-free i386 Packages
|  release v=6.0.5,o=Debian,a=stable,n=squeeze,l=Debian,c=non-free
|  origin ftp.de.debian.org
|  500 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ stable/contrib i386 Packages
|  release v=6.0.5,o=Debian,a=stable,n=squeeze,l=Debian,c=contrib
|  origin ftp.de.debian.org
|  500 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ stable/main i386 Packages
|  release v=6.0.5,o=Debian,a=stable,n=squeeze,l=Debian,c=main
|  origin ftp.de.debian.org
|  500 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ stable/non-free amd64 Packages
|  release v=6.0.5,o=Debian,a=stable,n=squeeze,l=Debian,c=non-free
|  origin ftp.de.debian.org
|  500 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ stable/contrib amd64 Packages
|  release v=6.0.5,o=Debian,a=stable,n=squeeze,l=Debian,c=contrib
|  origin ftp.de.debian.org
|  500 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ stable/main amd64 Packages
|  release v=6.0.5,o=Debian,a=stable,n=squeeze,l=Debian,c=main
|  origin ftp.de.debian.org
|  500 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ experimental/non-free Translation-en
|  500 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ experimental/main Translation-en
|  500 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ experimental/contrib Translation-en
|1 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ experimental/non-free i386 Packages
|  release

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

2012-09-02 Thread The Wanderer


On 09/02/2012 06:24 AM, lee wrote:


Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com writes:


On Du, 02 sep 12, 07:44:07, lee wrote:


See below: that would remove linux-sound-base, upgrade 52 packages and
downgrade 148 packages.


I picked a few of the to-be-downgraded packages and all of them were from
sid. Do you want to run sid or wheezy?


Sid is stable?


No. sid is the permanent name of *un*stable. Current stable is named squeeze.


I want to run testing and not stable, and shouldn't the packages in testing
not be newer than the ones in Sid? And if the packages in testing should be
more recent than the ones in stable, then why downgrade them to older
versions?


According to my understanding, packages go into sid first, and then get migrated
from there over to testing after a suitable time.

Thus, the newest packages are always in sid. (Or, in some cases, possibly in
experimental; I've never quite gotten the exact function of experimental figured
out.)

--
  The Wanderer

Warning: Simply because I argue an issue does not mean I agree with any
side of it.

Every time you let somebody set a limit they start moving it.
  - LiveJournal user antonia_tiger


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50434263.7080...@fastmail.fm

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

2012-09-02 Thread Camaleón

On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 12:24:42 +0200, lee wrote:

 Sid is stable? 

Dude... what a question for a user running testing :-)

Sid is the codename for unstable.

 I want to run testing and not stable, and shouldn't the
 packages in testing not be newer than the ones in Sid? 

Sid has the most updated verions of the packages.

 And if the packages in testing should be more recent than the ones in
 stable, then why downgrade them to older versions?

I think you need more reading on Debian available versions :-P

 Some packages currently installed may be from unstable or experimental
 because I needed more recent versions of them --- IIRC, the mumble ones
 are. I would want to keep those until testing catches up.

Then this can be the culprit for all your mess unless you had configure
apt repositories priorities properly.

 ,
 | lee@yun:~$ LANG=C apt-cache policy

(...)

What the hell is all that bunch of repositories? :-O

You need an urgent reorganization for your repos and also reducing the 
number of them as you have too many defined.

 While (unsuccessfully) trying to use more recent NVIDIA drivers because
 with the ones from testing the X-session randomly froze, I added the
 i386 architecture because that was recommended. I'm not so sure if that
 was a good idea ... Fortunately, the freezing problem seems to have been
 fixed :)

At a high cost, I'd say...

 BTW, what is the Debian way of specifying different locales for
 different users?

That will depend on the DE you're on (or if you're on none). There's more 
info on locales here:

http://wiki.debian.org/Locale

Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/k1vps8$tli$4...@ger.gmane.org

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

The Wanderer wande...@fastmail.fm writes:

 On 09/02/2012 06:24 AM, lee wrote:

 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com writes:

 On Du, 02 sep 12, 07:44:07, lee wrote:

 See below: that would remove linux-sound-base, upgrade 52 packages and
 downgrade 148 packages.

 I picked a few of the to-be-downgraded packages and all of them were from
 sid. Do you want to run sid or wheezy?

 Sid is stable?

 No. sid is the permanent name of *un*stable. Current stable is named squeeze.

Ah ok --- I'm bad with remembering names and stopped caring about how
the releases are called a long time ago. It would explain the attempt to
downgrade. I'm surprised that there are so many packages from unstable
installed, though. Yet that will fix itself over time when the packages
now in unstable make it into testing, I guess.

 I want to run testing and not stable, and shouldn't the packages in testing
 not be newer than the ones in Sid? And if the packages in testing should be
 more recent than the ones in stable, then why downgrade them to older
 versions?

 According to my understanding, packages go into sid first, and then get 
 migrated
 from there over to testing after a suitable time.

 Thus, the newest packages are always in sid. (Or, in some cases, possibly in
 experimental; I've never quite gotten the exact function of experimental 
 figured
 out.)

Hm I thought they travel from experimental through unstable into
testing. All this doesn't seem to cause the dependency problem with
alsa-base I have now ...


-- 
Debian testing amd64


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87r4qk32qx@yun.yagibdah.de

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

2012-09-02 Thread John Hasler

The Wanderer writes:
 Thus, the newest packages are always in sid. (Or, in some cases,
 possibly in experimental; I've never quite gotten the exact function
 of experimental figured out.)

The function of Experimental is experimentation.  Packages uploaded to
it stay there until removed or superseded.  There is no automatic
migration from Experimental to anywhere.
-- 
John Hasler


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/877gscid4w@thumper.dhh.gt.org

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

2012-09-02 Thread Mark Allums


On 9/2/2012 11:49 AM, John Hasler wrote:

The Wanderer writes:

Thus, the newest packages are always in sid. (Or, in some cases,
possibly in experimental; I've never quite gotten the exact function
of experimental figured out.)


The function of Experimental is experimentation.  Packages uploaded to
it stay there until removed or superseded.  There is no automatic
migration from Experimental to anywhere.



Sometimes, experimental is staging for future things, notably new 
kernels.  However, there is no guarantee that anything that appears 
there is in its final form.  It may change in incompatible ways.  Best 
practice is to avoid experimental most of the time.





--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50439090.7010...@allums.com

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

Camaleón noela...@gmail.com writes:

 Some packages currently installed may be from unstable or experimental
 because I needed more recent versions of them --- IIRC, the mumble ones
 are. I would want to keep those until testing catches up.

 Then this can be the culprit for all your mess unless you had configure
 apt repositories priorities properly.

What's wrong with it? Aptitude installs packages from testing by default
and installs packages from unstable or experimental when I tell it to,
which is what I want.

 ,
 | lee@yun:~$ LANG=C apt-cache policy

 (...)

 What the hell is all that bunch of repositories? :-O

 You need an urgent reorganization for your repos and also reducing the 
 number of them as you have too many defined.

Why? If I was to remove unstable and experimental, how would I install
packages from these when needed? And if I removed Debian multimedia, I
would miss a lot of packages. Perhaps I don't need the security updates
because there aren't any for testing, but they don't seem to hurt
anything.

 While (unsuccessfully) trying to use more recent NVIDIA drivers because
 with the ones from testing the X-session randomly froze, I added the
 i386 architecture because that was recommended. I'm not so sure if that
 was a good idea ... Fortunately, the freezing problem seems to have been
 fixed :)

 At a high cost, I'd say...

Well, what do you do when your X-session randomly freezes? You have two
choices: Remove the NVIDIA drivers that are in Debian and go back to
using the installer from NVIDIAs website (which is troublesome) --- or
try more recent versions that are in Debian (which didn't fully work and
required to do a downgrade (which was also troublesome) ). The problem
seems to have been somewhere else, and maybe it's still not fixed: I can
only say it didn't occur again yet after there were some kernel and
library upgrades a while ago.

The other case is the mumble server which had a bug so it won't run at
all, and that bug was already reported and even fixed in the version
available in unstable (or experimental). Again you have two choices: Use
the more recent version or get the source and compile and install it
yourself, ignoring the package management and modifying the startup
scripts. So what do you do? --- Besides, why don't they move packages
that do work from unstable/experimental into testing right away when the
packages in testing aren't working at all?

When using the packet management means high cost, what else do you
suggest to use?

 BTW, what is the Debian way of specifying different locales for
 different users?

 That will depend on the DE you're on (or if you're on none). There's more 
 info on locales here:

 http://wiki.debian.org/Locale

Given that a little less than 6.5% of the installed packages are not
from testing, about 93% of the wiki page applies ;) It doesn't tell me
how to set it for individual users, though. I guess it needs to go into
~/.bashrc. That may not be enough, I'll have to see ...


-- 
Debian testing amd64


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87a9x82uy1@yun.yagibdah.de

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

Camaleón noela...@gmail.com writes:

 On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 13:56:29 -0500, Charles Kroeger wrote:

 On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 17:20:02 +0200
 Camaleón noela...@gmail.com wrote:

 (...)
  
 http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/a/alsa-base/alsa-base_1.0.25+2+nmu1/changelog
* Drop linux-sound-base: OSS was removed from the kernel
pre-squeeze.
  (closes: #662038). Remove all module list generation machinery,
  it's now obsolete.
* Removing linux-sound-base also closes: #376241, #558408 the hard
way.
 
 Review the referenced bug reports and if there's nothing that solves
 the problem you're facing you can report it.

According to aptitude, alsa-base depends on linux-sound-base and
conflicts with linux-sound-base. So you either have to remove both of
them or keep their current versions.

So am I supposed to report this problem against alsa-base as a problem
of broken dependencies? Or should I remove both packages and
(forcefully) re-install alsa-base in case I don't have sound anymore
afterwards?

How did you circumvent the problem?


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87hariw5tp@yun.yagibdah.de

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

2012-09-01 Thread Joe

On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 09:38:42 +0200
lee l...@yun.yagibdah.de wrote:

 Camaleón noela...@gmail.com writes:
 
  On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 13:56:29 -0500, Charles Kroeger wrote:
 
  On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 17:20:02 +0200
  Camaleón noela...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  (...)
   
  http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/a/alsa-base/alsa-base_1.0.25+2+nmu1/changelog
 * Drop linux-sound-base: OSS was removed from the kernel
 pre-squeeze.
   (closes: #662038). Remove all module list generation
  machinery, it's now obsolete.
 * Removing linux-sound-base also closes: #376241, #558408 the
  hard way.
  
  Review the referenced bug reports and if there's nothing that
  solves the problem you're facing you can report it.
 
 According to aptitude, alsa-base depends on linux-sound-base and
 conflicts with linux-sound-base. So you either have to remove both of
 them or keep their current versions.
 
 So am I supposed to report this problem against alsa-base as a problem
 of broken dependencies? Or should I remove both packages and
 (forcefully) re-install alsa-base in case I don't have sound anymore
 afterwards?
 
 How did you circumvent the problem?
 
 

There wasn't a problem, or at least not when it happened in sid. I
waited a while in case it was a temporary condition, then let it go
ahead, and it Just Worked. I'm not very demanding about sound, but it
does appear to work OK.

-- 
Joe


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120901113910.07c8c...@jretrading.com

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

Joe j...@jretrading.com writes:

 On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 09:38:42 +0200
 lee l...@yun.yagibdah.de wrote:

 Camaleón noela...@gmail.com writes:
 
  On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 13:56:29 -0500, Charles Kroeger wrote:
 
  On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 17:20:02 +0200
  Camaleón noela...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  (...)
   
  http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/a/alsa-base/alsa-base_1.0.25+2+nmu1/changelog
 * Drop linux-sound-base: OSS was removed from the kernel
 pre-squeeze.
   (closes: #662038). Remove all module list generation
  machinery, it's now obsolete.
 * Removing linux-sound-base also closes: #376241, #558408 the
  hard way.
  
  Review the referenced bug reports and if there's nothing that
  solves the problem you're facing you can report it.
 
 According to aptitude, alsa-base depends on linux-sound-base and
 conflicts with linux-sound-base. So you either have to remove both of
 them or keep their current versions.
 
 So am I supposed to report this problem against alsa-base as a problem
 of broken dependencies? Or should I remove both packages and
 (forcefully) re-install alsa-base in case I don't have sound anymore
 afterwards?
 
 How did you circumvent the problem?
 
 

 There wasn't a problem, or at least not when it happened in sid.

Hm ok, I'm running testing, so things might be much different.

 I waited a while in case it was a temporary condition, then let it go
 ahead, and it Just Worked. I'm not very demanding about sound, but it
 does appear to work OK.

The problem came up maybe a week ago and I'm waiting since and still
have it.  It probably won't be fixed ...


-- 
http://www.asciiribbon.org/
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87fw71j27c@yun.yagibdah.de

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

2012-09-01 Thread Camaleón

On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 09:38:42 +0200, lee wrote:

 Camaleón noela...@gmail.com writes:

 http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/a/alsa-base/alsa-base_1.0.25+2+nmu1/changelog

(...)

 According to aptitude, alsa-base depends on linux-sound-base and
 conflicts with linux-sound-base. So you either have to remove both of
 them or keep their current versions.

I don't know how you reached that conflict. I'm running wheezy and dist-
upgrade did a good job by deleting linux-sound-base.

Also, the linux-sound-base dependency should not exist:

http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/alsa-base

 So am I supposed to report this problem against alsa-base as a problem
 of broken dependencies? Or should I remove both packages and
 (forcefully) re-install alsa-base in case I don't have sound anymore
 afterwards?
 
 How did you circumvent the problem?

Please run apt-get update  apt-get -V dist-upgrade and put here the 
output (and don't do the upgrade yet).

Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/k1t8h2$ko4$8...@ger.gmane.org

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

2012-09-01 Thread Dom


On 01/09/12 14:35, lee wrote:

Joej...@jretrading.com  writes:


On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 09:38:42 +0200
leel...@yun.yagibdah.de  wrote:


Camaleónnoela...@gmail.com  writes:


On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 13:56:29 -0500, Charles Kroeger wrote:


On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 17:20:02 +0200
Camaleónnoela...@gmail.com  wrote:


(...)


http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/a/alsa-base/alsa-base_1.0.25+2+nmu1/changelog

* Drop linux-sound-base: OSS was removed from the kernel
pre-squeeze.
  (closes: #662038). Remove all module list generation
machinery, it's now obsolete.
* Removing linux-sound-base also closes: #376241, #558408 the
hard way.

Review the referenced bug reports and if there's nothing that
solves the problem you're facing you can report it.


According to aptitude, alsa-base depends on linux-sound-base and
conflicts with linux-sound-base. So you either have to remove both of
them or keep their current versions.

So am I supposed to report this problem against alsa-base as a problem
of broken dependencies? Or should I remove both packages and
(forcefully) re-install alsa-base in case I don't have sound anymore
afterwards?

How did you circumvent the problem?




There wasn't a problem, or at least not when it happened in sid.


Hm ok, I'm running testing, so things might be much different.


I'm running testing/wheezy too. This is what I get:

dom@oz:~$ aptitude show alsa-base
Package: alsa-base
State: installed
Automatically installed: no
Version: 1.0.25+2+nmu2
Priority: optional
Section: sound
Maintainer: Debian ALSA Maintainers pkg-alsa-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Architecture: all
Uncompressed Size: 133 k
Depends: kmod, procps, udev
Recommends: alsa-utils
Suggests: alsa-oss, oss-compat
Breaks: linux-sound-base
Provides: alsa
Description: ALSA driver configuration files

There's no dependency on linux-sound-base there.

My sound seems to still be working too.

Have you done an apt-get or aptitude update recently?

--
Dom


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/504227dd.4090...@rpdom.net

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

2012-09-01 Thread Brad Rogers

On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 15:35:19 +0200
lee l...@yun.yagibdah.de wrote:

Hello lee,

The problem came up maybe a week ago and I'm waiting since and still
have it.  It probably won't be fixed ...

I recall reading about your problems.  When I performed the upgrade on
my testing system, I was a little apprehensive.  However after alsa,
essentially, forced the removal of linux-sound base, everything here
still works WRT sound.  Even after several reboots.

Others too have had no problem with the upgrade.  So, sorry to say this,
but it looks like there's an oddity in your set-up causing the problem
you're seeing.  Unfortunately, I'm no Debian/linux sound expert so can
only be of limited, if any, assistance.

Good luck. 

-- 
 Regards  _
 / )   The blindingly obvious is
/ _)radnever immediately apparent
Buy some love at the five and dime
You Have Placed A Chill In My Heart - Eurythmics


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: 200% OT: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

2012-09-01 Thread Chris Bannister

On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 04:19:15PM -0500, Charles Kroeger wrote:
 On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 19:50:02 +0200
 Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:
 
  A towel, it says, is about the most massively useful thing 
 
 Exactly Ralf..I'm always wearing a towel instead of my sarong that often goes
 missing. You see it's true, a man who knows where his towel is, is never 
 exposed.

The trouble with towels are that they get wetter as they dry. :)

-- 
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the 
oppressing. --- Malcolm X


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120901160038.GA18296@tal

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base

Dom to...@rpdom.net writes:

 On 01/09/12 14:35, lee wrote:
 Joej...@jretrading.com  writes:

 On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 09:38:42 +0200
 leel...@yun.yagibdah.de  wrote:

 Camaleónnoela...@gmail.com  writes:

 On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 13:56:29 -0500, Charles Kroeger wrote:

 On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 17:20:02 +0200
 Camaleónnoela...@gmail.com  wrote:

 (...)

 http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/a/alsa-base/alsa-base_1.0.25+2+nmu1/changelog
 * Drop linux-sound-base: OSS was removed from the kernel
 pre-squeeze.
   (closes: #662038). Remove all module list generation
 machinery, it's now obsolete.
 * Removing linux-sound-base also closes: #376241, #558408 the
 hard way.

 Review the referenced bug reports and if there's nothing that
 solves the problem you're facing you can report it.

 According to aptitude, alsa-base depends on linux-sound-base and
 conflicts with linux-sound-base. So you either have to remove both of
 them or keep their current versions.

 So am I supposed to report this problem against alsa-base as a problem
 of broken dependencies? Or should I remove both packages and
 (forcefully) re-install alsa-base in case I don't have sound anymore
 afterwards?

 How did you circumvent the problem?



 There wasn't a problem, or at least not when it happened in sid.

 Hm ok, I'm running testing, so things might be much different.

 I'm running testing/wheezy too. This is what I get:

 dom@oz:~$ aptitude show alsa-base
 Package: alsa-base
 State: installed
 Automatically installed: no
 Version: 1.0.25+2+nmu2
 Priority: optional
 Section: sound
 Maintainer: Debian ALSA Maintainers pkg-alsa-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
 Architecture: all
 Uncompressed Size: 133 k
 Depends: kmod, procps, udev
 Recommends: alsa-utils
 Suggests: alsa-oss, oss-compat
 Breaks: linux-sound-base
 Provides: alsa
 Description: ALSA driver configuration files

 There's no dependency on linux-sound-base there.

,
| lee@yun:~$ aptitude show alsa-base
| Paket: alsa-base
| Zustand: Installiert
| Automatisch installiert: nein
| Version: 1.0.23+dfsg-4
| Priorität: optional
| Bereich: sound
| Verwalter: Debian ALSA Maintainers pkg-alsa-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
| Architektur: all
| Unkomprimierte Größe: 516 k
| Hängt ab von: module-init-tools (= 3.2.1), linux-sound-base, udev
| Empfiehlt: alsa-utils
| Schlägt vor: apmd (= 3.0.2-1), alsa-oss, oss-compat
| Liefert: alsa
| Beschreibung: ALSA-Treiber-Konfigurationsdateien
`

So it depends on module-init-tools (= 3.2.1), linux-sound-base, udev.

 My sound seems to still be working too.

 Have you done an apt-get or aptitude update recently?

Yes, I did that yesterday ... and did it again now with the same
results. The linux-sound-base package recommends alsa-base.

Perhaps all this information refers to the packages that are currently
installed and not to the more recent ones.


-- 
http://www.asciiribbon.org/
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8739316ljc@yun.yagibdah.de

Re: alsa-base breaks linux-sound-base