Re: Time to test sarge
Goswin wrote:
So anyone willing to test testing, esspecialy a fresh
install, can point apt to:
deb http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/debian-pure64
testing main contrib non-free
This time I used this image:
sarge-amd64-netinst.iso 15-Jan-2005 17:38 125M
The installer from 15 January was terrible compared to the
11 February version. There was only the ext2 and xfs file
systems to choose from and the kernel had problems with the
sk98lin. I recommend the 15 January sarge netinst iso not be
used. I was able to get to the reboot and finish just to
test the upgrading of packages from debian-pure64 testing.
I used my current kernel to reboot into the sarge partition
so I could avoid the grub gamble.
I finished the installation and then went to upgrade from
the debian-pure64 testing just to see if everything worked.
I used dselect and just chose all of the identified new
and upgraded packages from testing. This was the problem
after downloading the 99MB of debs and trying to install:
(Reading database ... 9668 files and directories currently
installed.)
Preparing to replace libc6 2.3.2.ds1-18 (using
.../libc6_2.3.2.ds1-20_amd64.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement libc6 ...
dpkg: error processing
/var/cache/apt/archives/libc6_2.3.2.ds1-20_amd64.deb(--unpack):
trying to overwrite `/usr/lib64', which is also in package
base-files
Errors were encountered while processing:
/var/cache/apt/archives/libc6_2.3.2.ds1-20_amd64.deb
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
+++ Here is the info from apt-cache policy
base-files:
Installed: 3.1-0.0.0.2.pure64
Candidate: 3.1.2
Version Table:
3.1.2 0
500 http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org testing/main Packages
*** 3.1-0.0.0.2.pure64 0
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
libc6:
Installed: 2.3.2.ds1-18
Candidate: 2.3.2.ds1-20
Version Table:
2.3.2.ds1-20 0
500 http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org testing/main Packages
*** 2.3.2.ds1-18 0
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I had to fix the /usr/lib64 link about six weeks ago for
my own installation and the problem still seems to exist.
Maybe the sarge-amd64-netinst.iso from 15 January had the
problem and a newer iso would be fixed or the problem is
in the packages in testing. I could try to manually install
the newer base-files before the newer libc6. If the problem
is due to the base-files-3.1-0.0.0.2.pure64 being used in
that netinst then maybe removing that image would stop the
problem. That image should be removed anyway because of the
kernel module problems and bad features in my opinion.
I don't know if the problem is with the netinst iso or the
testing sarge.
------------------------
Reply to: