Re: apt-get upgrade error: package `coreutils' contains empty filename ?
Ah ha, now we are getting somewhere:
It looks like the coreutils.list file has a script instead of a
filelist. How do I go about fixing this for my system?
# cat /var/lib/dpkg/info/coreutils.list
#!/bin/sh
set -e
# Automatically added by installdeb-wordlist
case "$1" in abort-install|remove)
/usr/sbin/remove-default-wordlist wamerican
if [ -e /usr/share/debconf/confmodule ] ; then
. /usr/share/debconf/confmodule
db_purge
fi
esac
# End automatically added section
# Automatically added by dh_installdebconf
if [ "$1" = purge ] && [ -e /usr/share/debconf/confmodule ]; then
. /usr/share/debconf/confmodule
db_purge
fi
# End automatically added section
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Daniel Burrows <dburrows@debian.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 04:35:37PM -0800, Eric Higgins <erichiggins@gmail.com> was heard to say:
>> Still no luck on this. I can't even seem to force dpkg to upgrade:
>>
>> # apt-get -fm install dpkg
>> Reading package lists... Done
>> Building dependency tree... Done
>> Suggested packages:
>> lzma
>> The following packages will be upgraded:
>> dpkg
>> 1 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 59 not upgraded.
>> Need to get 0B/2039kB of archives.
>> After unpacking 0B of additional disk space will be used.
>> (Reading database ... dpkg: error processing
>> /var/cache/apt/archives/dpkg_1.13.26_arm.deb (--unpack):
>> files list file for package `coreutils' contains empty filename
>
> Do you see anything unusual in the file list for coreutils? (i.e.,
> /var/lib/dpkg/info/coreutils.list) For instance, are there empty lines?
> Does it look obviously corrupted?
>
> I would try "fixing" the problems that stop dpkg from processing the
> files list, then downloading the .deb for the *exact version* you have
> installed, and running "dpkg --install" on it to make sure the list is
> correct. NB: make sure it doesn't have anything that belongs to another
> package first!
>
> I've attached the files list for coreutils on my computer for
> comparison.
>
> Daniel
>
Reply to: