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

Re: dpkg-dev / dpkg broke? - POTATO - OOPS, My Mistake



   ...sorry, but the "better way" of fixing the upgrade problem is
at the bottom of this message (from David).  I was mistaken, and dpkg-dev was
possibly _not_ unpacked to my system before I used the nasty fix of
forcing the dpkg install here (although I did not notice any error
message pertaining to dpkg-dev not being installed from apt dselect).

Art

On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 03:51:42PM +0000, Art Lemasters wrote:
>      This appeared to be an overwrite issue to me, so I downloaded
> dpkg_1.4.1.8.deb via netscape (found it through "packages" on the
> debian www site) and did
> dpkg --force-overwrite -i dpkg_1.4.1.8.deb
> to install it.  It worked, although there might be a better way
> now (through apt, maybe?).  And BTW, dpkg-dev was installed via
> dselect apt here _before_ I had the dpkg archive misnomer and 
> overwrite problems.  ...hope this helps all those of you upgrading
> potato.  :-)
> 
> Art 
> 
> On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 07:29:05PM -0400, David Z. Maze wrote:
> > Seth R Arnold <sarnold@willamette.edu> writes:
> > SRA> I get this error on my potato i386:
> > SRA> dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/dpkg_1.4.1.8_i386.deb
> > SRA> (--unpack):
> > SRA>  trying to overwrite `/usr/share/man/man1/dpkg-buildpackage.1.gz', which is
> > SRA> also in package dpkg-dev
> > 
> > Among the packages APT didn't install is the new dpkg-dev; if you run
> > 'apt-get install dpkg-dev' and then proceed with the upgrade it works
> > fine.
> > 
> > dpkg should probably Conflicts: with dpkg-dev (<= 1.4.1.6).
> > 
> > -- 
> > David Maze             dmaze@mit.edu          http://donut.mit.edu/dmaze/
> > "Theoretical politics is interesting.  Politicking should be illegal."
> > 	-- Abra Mitchell
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe debian-user-request@lists.debian.org < /dev/null
> 
> 
> -- 
> Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe debian-user-request@lists.debian.org < /dev/null


Reply to: