Re: libsc7_2.3.1-3_amd64.deb problems
I have tried with synaptic.
(1) marking libsc8 (which was installed) for removal and unmarking libsc7_2.3.1-3_amd64.deb (which was not installed), a dist-upgrade is carried out, ending in the same error:
E: /var/cache/apt/archives/libsc7_2.3.1-3_amd64.deb trying to overwrite
'/usr/lib/libSCstates.so.7.1.0' whi is also in package libsc8.
Now marking libsc-dev for removal returns errors:
E: exim-daemon-light subprocesses post-installation script returned error exit status 1
E: exim4 depend problem
E: bds-mailx dep problem
E: acpid subprocess post-install error 1
E: mailx dep problem
I.e, it drops now in the same errors that I had reported for i386. "Florian Kulzer" <email@example.com> kindly advided me that it is a bug fixed in unstable, not yet passed to lenny.
--- On Tue, 5/6/08, Lennart Sorensen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> From: Lennart Sorensen <email@example.com>
> Subject: Re: libsc7_2.3.1-3_amd64.deb problems
> To: "Francesco Pietra" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Cc: "C. Ahlstrom" <email@example.com>, "debian64" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Date: Tuesday, May 6, 2008, 9:32 AM
> On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 08:53:27AM -0700, Francesco Pietra
> > Hi:
> > Sorry for this lengthy dealing with libsc7/libsc8,
> though I would like to clean the system, i.e. not to have
> these issues raised at each "apt-get upgrade".
> Actually, now "apt-get upgrade" only results in:
> > Reading package list ...Done
> > Building dependency tree ... Done
> > You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to
> > Packages with unmet dependencies:
> > libsc-dev: Depends: libsc7 (= 2.3.1-3) but it is not
> > It seems to be unable to upgrading, unless there is
> nothing else.
> > I think that I don't need either libsc7 or libsc8.
> Both come from "The Scientific Computing Toolkit"
> (Sandja Lab, mpqc) an extraordinary quantum mechanical
> package that I used successfully, but one that
> unfortunately is not being developed toward organic
> chemical applications. Therefore I don't use it any
> more. There is a relationship with "ghemical"
> that I don't use either on this amd64 system (I barely
> run 'startx' on rare occasions)
> > I did some search:
> > apt-cache rdepends libsc7
> > ENTER
> > Reverse Depends:
> > mpqc-support
> > mpqc
> > libsc-dev
> > libghemical3gf
> > apt-cache rdepends libsc8
> > ENTER
> > Reverse Depends:
> > [nothing reported]
> > If I carry out the same commands with i386 (where mpqc
> is still installed), for libsc7 there is one line more
> "libghemical0c2a", while for libsc8 the answer is
> "no package found".
> Well mpqc seems to use it too. It seems odd that libsc8
> conflicts with
> libsc7, in fact I would think that is a bug and should be
> reported as
> such. If nothing else it should conflict if it can't
> be installed at
> the same time.
> Len Sorensen
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ