Subject: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an uninstallable dependency
(zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 10:14:02 +0300
Package: zlib1g-dev
Version: 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4
Severity: important
When trying to install zlib1g-dev, apt fails after reporting this:
....
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of zlib1g-dev:i386:
zlib1g-dev:i386 depends on zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4); however:
Version of zlib1g:i386 on system is 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7.
....
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-2-686-pae (SMP w/8 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Versions of packages zlib1g-dev depends on:
ii libc6-dev [libc-dev] 2.13-32
ii zlib1g 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7
zlib1g-dev recommends no packages.
zlib1g-dev suggests no packages.
-- no debconf information
Acknowledgement sent
to Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Mark Brown <[email protected]>.
(Tue, 22 May 2012 07:27:08 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an uninstallable
dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 02:23:18 -0500
Hi,
Sophoklis Goumas wrote:
> dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of zlib1g-dev:i386:
> zlib1g-dev:i386 depends on zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4); however:
> Version of zlib1g:i386 on system is 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7.
Your copy of apt seems confused. What version of apt do you have
installed? What command did you use to upgrade zlib1g-dev?
Thanks for writing,
Jonathan
Subject: Re: Bug#673939: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an
uninstallable dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 10:11:42 +0100
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:14:02AM +0300, Sophoklis Goumas wrote:
> When trying to install zlib1g-dev, apt fails after reporting this:
> ....
> dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of zlib1g-dev:i386:
> zlib1g-dev:i386 depends on zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4); however:
> Version of zlib1g:i386 on system is 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7.
> ....
This is not a bug in the package, the library package is built at the
same time as the -dev package and -7 of both is available in the archive.
When something like this happens you need to check that the relevant
pacakge is actually missing, frequently it's a bug in the dependency
(eg, it itself has an unsatisfied depend and is uninstallable) but in
this case it looks like a bug in apt as the dependencies for zlib1g are
very basic.
Acknowledgement sent
to Sophoklis Goumas <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Mark Brown <[email protected]>.
(Tue, 22 May 2012 10:43:44 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an uninstallable
dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 13:40:10 +0300
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
> Your copy of apt seems confused.
What do you mean? What makes you think so?
> What version of apt do you have installed?
# apt-get -v
apt 1.5 for i386 compiled on May 11 2012 17:36:54
Supported modules:
*Ver: Standard .deb
*Pkg: Debian dpkg interface (Priority 30)
Pkg: Debian APT solver interface (Priority -1000)
S.L: 'deb' Standard Debian binary tree
S.L: 'deb-src' Standard Debian source tree
Idx: Debian Source Index
Idx: Debian Package Index
Idx: Debian Translation Index
Idx: Debian dpkg status file
Idx: EDSP scenario file
>What command did you use to upgrade zlib1g-dev?
After a:
# apt-get update ; apt-get dist-upgrade
...
You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
zlib1g-dbg : Depends: zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4) but 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 is installed
zlib1g-dev : Depends: zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4) but 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 is installed
E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
I did what produced that I'm reporting, which is:
# apt-get -f install
...
The following extra packages will be installed:
zlib1g-dbg zlib1g-dev
The following packages will be upgraded:
zlib1g-dbg zlib1g-dev
2 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 96 not upgraded.
4 not fully installed or removed.
Need to get 0 B/556 kB of archives.
After this operation, 71.7 kB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? Y
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/apt-listchanges", line 237, in <module>
main()
File "/usr/bin/apt-listchanges", line 48, in main
debs = apt_listchanges.read_apt_pipeline(config)
File "/usr/share/apt-listchanges/apt_listchanges.py", line 83, in
read_apt_pipeline
return map(lambda pkg: filenames[pkg], order)
File "/usr/share/apt-listchanges/apt_listchanges.py", line 83, in <lambda>
return map(lambda pkg: filenames[pkg], order)
KeyError: 'zlib1g-dev'
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of zlib1g-dev:i386:
zlib1g-dev:i386 depends on zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4); however:
Version of zlib1g:i386 on system is 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7.
dpkg: error processing zlib1g-dev:i386 (--configure):
dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libavcodec-dev:i386:
libavcodec-dev:i386 depends on zlib1g-dev; however:
Package zlib1g-dev:i386 is not configured yet.
dpkg: error processing libavcodec-dev:i386 (--configure):
dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libdirectfb-dev:
libdirectfb-dev depends on zlib1g-dev (>= 1:1.1.3); however:
Package zlib1g-dev:i386 is not configured yet.
dpkg: error processing libdirectfb-dev (--configure):
dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of zlib1g-dbg:
zlib1g-dbg depends on zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4); however:
Version of zlib1g:i386 on system is 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7.
dpkg: error processing zlib1g-dbg (--configure):
dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
Errors were encountered while processing:
zlib1g-dev:i386
libavcodec-dev:i386
libdirectfb-dev
zlib1g-dbg
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
Well... what do you think now?
Sophoklis
Subject: Re: Bug#673939: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an
uninstallable dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 13:55:10 +0300
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Mark Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> ...
>
> When something like this happens you need to check that the relevant
> pacakge is actually missing, frequently it's a bug in the dependency
> (eg, it itself has an unsatisfied depend and is uninstallable) but in
> this case it looks like a bug in apt as the dependencies for zlib1g are
> very basic.
Well, isn't this what's happening now?
As it seems below, package zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4) is not available.
# apt-cache policy zlib1g
zlib1g:
Installed: 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7
Candidate: 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7
Version table:
*** 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 0
500 http://ftp.gr.debian.org/debian/ unstable/main i386 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
1:1.2.7.dfsg-1 0
500 http://ftp.gr.debian.org/debian/ testing/main i386 Packages
Even more, zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4) is the only one not showing here:
http://i.imgur.com/xMcoJ.png
Sophoklis
Subject: Re: Bug#673939: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an
uninstallable dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 14:04:54 +0100
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 01:55:10PM +0300, Sophoklis Goumas wrote:
> Well, isn't this what's happening now?
Not in so far as you've shown.
> As it seems below, package zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4) is not available.
> # apt-cache policy zlib1g
> zlib1g:
> Installed: 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7
> Candidate: 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7
> Version table:
> *** 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 0
> 500 http://ftp.gr.debian.org/debian/ unstable/main i386 Packages
> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
> 1:1.2.7.dfsg-1 0
> 500 http://ftp.gr.debian.org/debian/ testing/main i386 Packages
Why should it be? What makes you think there is a problem with the zlib
package and not with your local configuration, your version of apt or
the archive? Every binary in the zlib package is built with the same
version...
You're not explaining why you believe there's a problem in the package
here and not with your local system or configuration - if zlib really
were broken you'd expect a very large number of users to have noticed.
It looks rather like you're trying to install an old, unavailable
package for some reason.
> Even more, zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4) is the only one not showing here:
> http://i.imgur.com/xMcoJ.png
Why on *earth* are you pasting a web page as an enormous image? That's
not in the slightest bit helpful - it's not legible for one thing on a
large proportion of screens, and trying to do searches on images isn't
terribly helpful either.
I'm just guessing as to what you mean but I rather suspect you've just
not understood what the output of that page means. It's just a list of
packages that are installed in the archive at the minute.
Acknowledgement sent
to Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Mark Brown <[email protected]>.
(Tue, 22 May 2012 13:57:10 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an uninstallable
dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 08:54:19 -0500
Hi again,
Sophoklis Goumas wrote:
> What do you mean? What makes you think so?
[...]
> # apt-get update ; apt-get dist-upgrade
[...]
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> zlib1g-dbg : Depends: zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4) but 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 is installed
> zlib1g-dev : Depends: zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4) but 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 is installed
> E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
>
> I did what produced that I'm reporting, which is:
> # apt-get -f install
I see. A part of the bug is in the above message ("Try using -f").
It is normal for some packages to have unmet dependencies in unstable.
A good way to cope is to use normal "apt-get upgrade" (not
dist-upgrade) and let the packages have some time to sync up.
*thinks more*
But I don't think that is what is happening above. I think what
happened is that you installed zlib 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 from
incoming.debian.org "by hand" using "dpkg --install" packages from
incoming.debian.org and then tried to use apt-get to upgrade other
packages and encountered the above trouble.
Am I guessing correctly? If so, I want to say "don't do that, then".
But I don't have any leg to stand on, since we don't provide some
other obvious command which would do the right thing, namely to
install the package specified on the command line while ensuring
that dependencies of other packages remain satisfied.
If I have guessed correctly, the underlying bug would be a wishlist
bug against apt: please provide a simple way to install a single .deb
package from incoming.debian.org.
Did I guess right?
Hope that helps and sorry for the trouble,
Jonathan
[1] http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-faq/ch-ftparchives.en.html#s-unstable
Acknowledgement sent
to Sophoklis Goumas <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Mark Brown <[email protected]>.
(Tue, 22 May 2012 14:06:08 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an uninstallable
dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 17:03:58 +0300
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]> wrote:
> ...
>
> It is normal for some packages to have unmet dependencies in unstable.
> A good way to cope is to use normal "apt-get upgrade" (not
> dist-upgrade) and let the packages have some time to sync up.
>
No. Things did not resolve with "apt-get upgrade.
> ...
>
> But I don't think that is what is happening above. I think what
> happened is that you installed zlib 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 from
> incoming.debian.org "by hand" using "dpkg --install" packages from
> incoming.debian.org and then tried to use apt-get to upgrade other
> packages and encountered the above trouble.
>
> Am I guessing correctly? If so, I want to say "don't do that, then".
>
No I did not install zlib 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 "by hand".
>
> But I don't have any leg to stand on, since we don't provide some
> other obvious command which would do the right thing, namely to
> install the package specified on the command line while ensuring
> that dependencies of other packages remain satisfied.
>
Perhaps someone could shed some light
as to how one could install zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4).
All I can get on this is it's the news announcing that particular
version has been accepted [1]. But I can only think of obscure ways
of reaching that version. A .deb and/or how to make it would be fine.
>
> If I have guessed correctly, the underlying bug would be a wishlist
> bug against apt: please provide a simple way to install a single .deb
> package from incoming.debian.org.
>
> Did I guess right?
>
That's not a question for me, I guess - is it?
Sophoklis
[1] http://packages.qa.debian.org/z/zlib/news/20120520T160616Z.html
Subject: Re: Bug#673939: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an
uninstallable dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 17:10:24 +0300
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Mark Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 01:55:10PM +0300, Sophoklis Goumas wrote:
>
>> Well, isn't this what's happening now?
>
> Not in so far as you've shown.
What further input would you want shown in order to tell
what's happening and I can't get zlib1g-dev (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7) installed?
>
>>
>> As it seems below, package zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4) is not available.
>> ...
>>
>
> Why should it be? What makes you think there is a problem with the zlib
> package and not with your local configuration, your version of apt or
> the archive? Every binary in the zlib package is built with the same
> version...
>
> You're not explaining why you believe there's a problem in the package
> here and not with your local system or configuration - if zlib really
> were broken you'd expect a very large number of users to have noticed.
> It looks rather like you're trying to install an old, unavailable
> package for some reason.
>
Because I read this:
# apt-get update ; apt-get -y dist-upgrade
...
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
zlib1g-dbg : Depends: zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4) but 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 is installed
zlib1g-dev : Depends: zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4) but 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 is installed
E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
>>
>> ..
>> Even more, zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4) is the only one not showing here:
>> http://i.imgur.com/xMcoJ.png
>
> Why on *earth* are you pasting a web page as an enormous image? That's
> not in the slightest bit helpful - it's not legible for one thing on a
> large proportion of screens, and trying to do searches on images isn't
> terribly helpful either.
>
I think this is better than to paste the contents of an entire page to show
that I can't get to the desired version, it's not available - or is it?
>
> I'm just guessing as to what you mean but I rather suspect you've just
> not understood what the output of that page means. It's just a list of
> packages that are installed in the archive at the minute.
>
Thus, zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4) is available.
Sophoklis
Acknowledgement sent
to Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Mark Brown <[email protected]>.
(Tue, 22 May 2012 14:24:04 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an uninstallable
dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 09:20:29 -0500
Sophoklis Goumas wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]> wrote:
>> But I don't think that is what is happening above. I think what
>> happened is that you installed zlib 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 from
[...]
>> Did I guess right?
>
> That's not a question for me, I guess - is it?
Yes, it's a question for you. How was zlib1g 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 installed?
Jonathan
(As for how to recover: I imagine the kind people at debian-user can
help.)
Acknowledgement sent
to Sophoklis Goumas <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Mark Brown <[email protected]>.
(Tue, 22 May 2012 14:33:14 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an uninstallable
dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 17:29:19 +0300
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sophoklis Goumas wrote:
>> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> But I don't think that is what is happening above. I think what
>>> happened is that you installed zlib 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 from
> [...]
>>> Did I guess right?
>>
>> That's not a question for me, I guess - is it?
>
> Yes, it's a question for you. How was zlib1g 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 installed?
>
I've already answered that:
>> ...
>> No I did not install zlib 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 "by hand".
>> ...
By not "by hand" I mean not by using dpkg as you've mentioned.
But by "apt-get install zlib1g zlib1g-dev zlib1-dbg" I guess.
Something must have been messed through the updates.
Sophoklis
Acknowledgement sent
to Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Mark Brown <[email protected]>.
(Tue, 22 May 2012 14:57:21 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an uninstallable
dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 09:36:21 -0500
Sophoklis Goumas wrote:
> I've already answered that:
>> Sophoklis Goumas wrote:
>>> ...
>>> No I did not install zlib 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 "by hand".
>>> ...
>
> By not "by hand" I mean not by using dpkg as you've mentioned.
> But by "apt-get install zlib1g zlib1g-dev zlib1-dbg" I guess.
Ok, thanks. I'm cc-ing the apt maintainers in case they have
ideas for debugging this.
apt maintainers: when Sophoklis tried a dist-upgrade, he got the
following result:
# apt-get update ; apt-get dist-upgrade
...
You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
zlib1g-dbg : Depends: zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4) but 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 is installed
zlib1g-dev : Depends: zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4) but 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 is installed
E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
zlib1g-dev and zlib1g are "Architecture: any" binary packages from
the same source package, and zlib1g-dev 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 from the
archive depends on zlib1g 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7, not -4. Any suggestions
to help track this down?
Sophoklis: /var/log/apt/term.log, /var/log/dpkg.log, and "apt-cache
policy zlib1g zlib1g-dev" may help piece the story together.
Sorry for the fuss.
Jonathan
Acknowledgement sent
to Sophoklis Goumas <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Mark Brown <[email protected]>.
(Tue, 22 May 2012 15:12:07 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an uninstallable
dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 18:08:19 +0300
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]> wrote:
> ...
> Sophoklis: /var/log/apt/term.log, /var/log/dpkg.log, and "apt-cache
> policy zlib1g zlib1g-dev" may help piece the story together.
> ...
>
Let's tie the pieces of the story together then:
# cat /var/log/apt/term.log
http://paste.debian.net/170610/
# grep zlib1g /var/log/dpkg.log
http://paste.debian.net/170611/
# apt-cache policy zlib1g zlibg1-dev zlib1g-dbg
http://paste.debian.net/170612/
> ...
> Sorry for the fuss.
> ...
Oh don't apologize. Please. Don't.
On the contrary: thank you all.
Sophoklis
Acknowledgement sent
to Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Mark Brown <[email protected]>.
(Tue, 22 May 2012 15:21:19 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to Sophoklis Goumas <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Mark Brown <[email protected]>.
(Tue, 22 May 2012 16:00:05 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an uninstallable
dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 18:57:30 +0300
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:19 PM, Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The interesting part is in the section marked "...". Somehow
> zlib1g-dev got unpacked in the wrong version without being configured.
>
Allrighty then:
http://paste.debian.net/plain/170619
Sophoklis
Acknowledgement sent
to Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Mark Brown <[email protected]>.
(Tue, 22 May 2012 16:33:11 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an uninstallable
dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 11:31:28 -0500
retitle 673939 apt: please be smarter about resuming after an interrupted/failed unpack
# difficult
severity 673939 wishlist
reassign 673939 apt 0.9.3
reopen 673939
quit
Sophoklis Goumas wrote:
> Allrighty then:
Excellent, thanks for the log. The story starts here:
> Log started: 2012-05-21 08:03:11
[...]
> Preparing to replace zlib1g:i386 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4 (using .../zlib1g_1%3a1.2.7.dfsg-5_i386.deb) ...
> Unpacking replacement zlib1g:i386 ...
> Setting up zlib1g:i386 (1:1.2.7.dfsg-5) ...
[...]
> Unpacking replacement ffmpeg-doc ...
> dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/ffmpeg-doc_7%3a0.10.3-dmo1_all.deb (--unpack):
> trying to overwrite '/usr/share/doc-base/ffmpeg-doc', which is also in package libav-doc 6:0.8.2-2
[...]
> Errors were encountered while processing:
> /var/cache/apt/archives/ffmpeg-doc_7%3a0.10.3-dmo1_all.deb
> Log ended: 2012-05-21 08:05:14
At this point, the updated zlib1g has been unpacked, but not updated
zlib1g-dev, and apt encounters an error during the unpack procedure.
It stops to let the sysadmin take care of it, and then the next apt
command begins its work with "dpkg --configure -a":
> Log started: 2012-05-21 18:27:08
[...]
> Setting up libogg-dev (1.3.0-1) ...
> dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of zlib1g-dev:i386:
> zlib1g-dev:i386 depends on zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4); however:
> Version of zlib1g:i386 on system is 1:1.2.7.dfsg-5.
And it is unable to recover. A smarter package manager would realize
it is time to download and unpack either the updated versions of
zlib1g-dev and zlib1g-dbg (in effect continuing the interrupted
upgrade) or the previous version of zlib1g (in effect rolling it back)
or print some advice help the human operator to do so.
Roughly speaking: imagine three packages A, B, and D. The new version
of A depends on D. The package B is utterly broken. The sysadmin
tries:
$ apt-get install A B D
Unpacking replacement A...
Unpacking B...
(breaks)
$ dpkg --purge B; # Hopefully this will let me recover.
$ apt-get install; # Back to a sane state?
Setting up A...
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of A:
A depends on B; however:
Package B is not installed.
$ ???; # Guess not.
Reassigning to apt.
Thanks,
Jonathan
Changed Bug title to 'apt: please be smarter about resuming after an interrupted/failed unpack' from 'zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an uninstallable dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))'
Request was from Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]>
to [email protected].
(Tue, 22 May 2012 16:33:13 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to David Kalnischkies <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to APT Development Team <[email protected]>.
(Tue, 22 May 2012 17:39:05 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: zlib1g-dev: version 1:1.2.7.dfsg-7 requires an uninstallable
dependency (zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4))
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 19:37:23 +0200
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Log started: 2012-05-21 18:27:08
> [...]
>> Setting up libogg-dev (1.3.0-1) ...
>> dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of zlib1g-dev:i386:
>> zlib1g-dev:i386 depends on zlib1g (= 1:1.2.7.dfsg-4); however:
>> Version of zlib1g:i386 on system is 1:1.2.7.dfsg-5.
>
> And it is unable to recover. A smarter package manager would realize
> it is time to download and unpack either the updated versions of
> zlib1g-dev and zlib1g-dbg (in effect continuing the interrupted
> upgrade) or the previous version of zlib1g (in effect rolling it back)
> or print some advice help the human operator to do so.
The newer versions should already be in /var/cache/apt/archives, so a
download doesn't need to happen (usually). A rollback can't happen
as downgrades aren't supported in debian (even if they quiet often work
for specific packages, but i wouldn't depend on that)
Recovering can be quiet a problem, and can depend on the overall
situation so it is not really easy. After all, if apt could print a nice
message detailing what an operator can do, why doesn't do this
itself instead of printing these lines… no, you get these sometimes
quiet cryptic messages because apt has no idea how to proceed.
So, Sophoklis, are you still in that situation?
If so, could you attach your /var/lib/dpkg/status to the bugreport
(or if you don't want to have this information public on the net,
feel free to send it privately to me) please?
Recovery should be possible by either using dpkg directly or
helping apt: "apt-get install -f" tries to figure out everything
by itself. Add packages to this command and it will stop trying
for itself and present you with what your actions would cause
it to think.
Start with: apt-get install -f zlib1g-dev zlib1g-dbg
(This might be already the solution or)
apt might find addition violated dependencies.
With the file mentioned above i can help you in recovery as
well if you can't make it yourself.
I am pretty sure we can't fix apt to be "intelligent" in all possible
circumstances, but we might get it working in situations similar
to this one maybe.
Tip of the day: -f stands for --fix-broken, not for --force
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
Acknowledgement sent
to Jonathan Nieder <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to APT Development Team <[email protected]>.
(Tue, 22 May 2012 18:42:11 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent
to Sophoklis Goumas <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to APT Development Team <[email protected]>.
(Tue, 22 May 2012 20:39:13 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 8:37 PM, David Kalnischkies
<[email protected]> wrote:
> ...
> So, Sophoklis, are you still in that situation?
> ...
Nope not any more, I bypassed this situation with manual or
"by hand" installation (with dpkg -i). And fortunately apt did a
`normal' installation right afterwards with the dist-upgrade that
followed. Thanks.
>
> If so, could you attach your /var/lib/dpkg/status to the bugreport
> (or if you don't want to have this information public on the net,
> feel free to send it privately to me) please?
>
I must have passed out that false impression of being a privacy
paranoid when I was snipping logs. No, I was doing this only for
reasons of economy. So you asked for it and I attach it.
>
> Recovery should be possible by either using dpkg directly or
> helping apt: "apt-get install -f" tries to figure out everything
> by itself. Add packages to this command and it will stop trying
> for itself and present you with what your actions would cause
> it to think.
>
> Start with: apt-get install -f zlib1g-dev zlib1g-dbg
> (This might be already the solution or)
> apt might find addition violated dependencies.
> With the file mentioned above i can help you in recovery as
> well if you can't make it yourself.
>
The: # apt-get install -f zlib1g-dev zlib1-dbg
method didn't work out reporting the same dependency matters.
The dpkg did indeed work.
Thanks everyone, for all the responses and for your time,
Sophoklis
Debbugs is free software and licensed under the terms of the GNU General
Public License version 2. The current version can be obtained
from https://bugs.debian.org/debbugs-source/.