[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#180249: marked as done (kernel-installer fails with installation of dash)



Your message dated Thu, 13 Feb 2003 01:17:54 -0500
with message-id <E18jCh0-0008Qu-00@auric.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#180249: fixed in base-installer 0.017
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 8 Feb 2003 13:48:16 +0000
>From tdykstra@famdijkstra.org Sat Feb 08 07:48:16 2003
Return-path: <tdykstra@famdijkstra.org>
Received: from pieck.student.uva.nl [146.50.96.22] 
	by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
	id 18hVL5-0000FA-00; Sat, 08 Feb 2003 07:48:15 -0600
Received: from baardmijt ([146.50.160.23]) by
          pieck.student.uva.nl (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP
          id H9ZT0E00.JQL for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Sat, 8 Feb 2003
          14:48:14 +0100 
Received: from roodbaard ([192.168.13.2])
	by baardmijt with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 18hVL2-00041r-00; Sat, 08 Feb 2003 14:48:12 +0100
Received: from tdykstra by roodbaard with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
	id 18hVL2-0000HR-00; Sat, 08 Feb 2003 14:48:12 +0100
From: "Tim Dijkstra (tdykstra)" <tim@famdijkstra.org>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: kernel-installer fails with installation of dash
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.50
Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2003 14:48:11 +0100
Message-Id: <[🔎] E18hVL2-0000HR-00@roodbaard>
Sender: Tim Dijkstra <tdykstra@famdijkstra.org>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0
	tests=SPAM_PHRASE_00_01
	version=2.41
X-Spam-Level: 

Package: kernel-installer
Version: N/A; reported 2003-02-08
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable

Installing the kernel fails with the following error:

unpacking dash (from .../archives/dash_0.4.1_i386.deb)
/target/usr/bin/dpkg: relocation error; /target/lib/libnss_compat.so.2:
symbol _nss_files_parse_<unreadable writing by me but something
like:>puert, version GITBC_2.0 not defined in file libc.so.6 with link
time reference
E: Sub_process /target/usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (127)

this bug seems really similar to bug #179994

-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux roodbaard 2.4.20 #1 di jan 14 22:17:08 CET 2003 i686
Locale: LANG=nl_NL@euro, LC_CTYPE=nl_NL@euro


---------------------------------------
Received: (at 180249-close) by bugs.debian.org; 13 Feb 2003 06:23:22 +0000
>From katie@auric.debian.org Thu Feb 13 00:23:22 2003
Return-path: <katie@auric.debian.org>
Received: from auric.debian.org [206.246.226.45] (mail)
	by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
	id 18jCmI-0000XE-00; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 00:23:22 -0600
Received: from katie by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 18jCh0-0008Qu-00; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 01:17:54 -0500
From: Matt Kraai <kraai@debian.org>
To: 180249-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.32 $
Subject: Bug#180249: fixed in base-installer 0.017
Message-Id: <E18jCh0-0008Qu-00@auric.debian.org>
Sender: Archive Administrator <katie@auric.debian.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 01:17:54 -0500
Delivered-To: 180249-close@bugs.debian.org

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
base-installer, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

base-installer_0.017.dsc
  to pool/main/b/base-installer/base-installer_0.017.dsc
base-installer_0.017.tar.gz
  to pool/main/b/base-installer/base-installer_0.017.tar.gz
base-installer_0.017_all.udeb
  to pool/main/b/base-installer/base-installer_0.017_all.udeb
kernel-installer_0.017_all.udeb
  to pool/main/b/base-installer/kernel-installer_0.017_all.udeb



A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 180249@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Matt Kraai <kraai@debian.org> (supplier of updated base-installer package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 21:46:13 -0800
Source: base-installer
Binary: kernel-installer base-installer
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.017
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team <debian-boot@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: Matt Kraai <kraai@debian.org>
Description: 
 base-installer - Install the base system (udeb)
 kernel-installer - Install the kernel (udeb)
Closes: 180249
Changes: 
 base-installer (0.017) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * Petter Reinholdtsen
     - Moved apt-update and apt-install to rootskel.
   * Matt Kraai
     - Unset Debconf variables before calling apt-install (closes:
       #180249).
     - Remove local component for network installs.
Files: 
 00a04ba551f1d27150a61afeecb7d9ec 637 debian-installer required base-installer_0.017.dsc
 348745baf0b6998f467b98ffb0a7f0f7 6446 debian-installer required base-installer_0.017.tar.gz
 012bbd0c39d2cab08bc91e17c35dc880 1964 debian-installer required base-installer_0.017_all.udeb
 4257a03e7af6381f51bbc7ceb4e06d0a 1474 debian-installer required kernel-installer_0.017_all.udeb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+SzFefNdgYxVXvBARAr4yAJ42ljoWrfBgFzk/aQj1UPNFEdLAIwCeNlkT
dZIZwLdqgXoZaKYDcSCzkL0=
=kuil
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: