On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 09:39:31AM +0100, michael wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-10-13 at 20:16 +0200, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 13, 2007 at 18:26:00 +0100, michael wrote:
> > > I'm using unstable and got the following error when trying to install
> > > sshfs - anybody else since this or know the underlying problem? Ta, M
> > >
> > > michael@manchester-campaigns:~/work/myPresentations$ sudo apt-get
> > > install sshfs
> > > Reading package lists... Done
> > > Building dependency tree
> > > Reading state information... Done
> > > The following extra packages will be installed:
> > > fuse-utils libfuse2
> > > The following NEW packages will be installed
> > > fuse-utils libfuse2 sshfs
> > > 0 upgraded, 3 newly installed, 0 to remove and 155 not upgraded.
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > I am not sure if it is a good idea to let outdated packages pile up like
> > that. If you create your own unique mix of new and old packages then you
> > might create your own unique problems. At the very least I would make
> > sure that all the "required" and "important" packages are up to date
> > before installing new software. (NB: This is a general remark, your
> > current problem might have other causes, see below.)
>
> Noted but was sure had relevant packages...
>
...
>
> Somehow I opened another thread ("installation problems (fuse)" 15 Oct
> 2007) and 'initscripts' was mentioned there too but a reinstall didn't
> help. In the end, copying /lib/init/vars.sh from another machine allowed
> the post/pre-installation scripts for fuse-utils to do its job. I've no
> idea what said file is nor why it was missing from my machine.
this is the problem with the out-of-date packages. There may be
packages that require an older version of initscripts but fuse was
assuming a newer version without necessarily depending on it (probably
a bug I suppose). So when you reinstalled initscripts, you may have
just reinstalled the version that doesn't have the file that fuse is
looking for.
Now I don't know the history of initscripts of that file, so that is
just a supposition on my part, but it highlights the problems of mixed
systems. If some package in the tree has dependencies that aren't
quite right whether through an assumption on the part of the
maintainer or some other minor problem, it could escalate across the
system. At least that's how I view it.
So that's all just random thoughts on my part and probably don't bear
any resemblence to reality, but I think its a reasonable way to look
at it. Get that system updated and you'd probably not have these
problems.
.02
A
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature