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

more potato->wqoody upgrade problems



Hi!

When dist-upgrading a potato system with libc6-dev (2.1.3-18) and
l;ibstdc++2.10-dev (1:2.95.2-13) installed, the upgrade fails and leaves
the system unusable. Manually installing a new libc6 fixes the problem.

Preparing to replace libstdc++2.10-dev 1:2.95.2-13 (using .../libstdc++2.10-dev_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb) ...
/usr/bin/perl: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.2' not found (required by /lib/libdb.so.3)
dpkg: warning - old pre-removal script returned error exit status 1
dpkg - trying script from the new package instead ...
/usr/bin/perl: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.2' not found (required by /lib/libdb.so.3)
dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/libstdc++2.10-dev_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb (--unpack):
 subprocess new pre-removal script returned error exit status 1
dpkg: regarding .../libc6-dev_2.2.3-5_i386.deb containing libc6-dev:
 libc6-dev conflicts with libstdc++2.10-dev (<< 1:2.95.2-15)
  libstdc++2.10-dev (version 1:2.95.2-13) is installed.
dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-dev_2.2.3-5_i386.deb (--unpack):
 conflicting packages - not installing libc6-dev
Preparing to replace libc6 2.1.3-18 (using .../libc6_2.2.3-5_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement libc6 ...
Replacing files in old package ldso ...
Replacing files in old package netbase ...
Errors were encountered while processing:
 /var/cache/apt/archives/libstdc++2.10-dev_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb
 /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-dev_2.2.3-5_i386.deb
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)

-- 
Kind regards,
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| Bas Zoetekouw                  | Si l'on sait exactement ce   |
|--------------------------------| que l'on va faire, a quoi    |
| zoetekw@phys.uu.nl             | bon le faire?                |
|    bas@A-Es2.uu.nl             |               Pablo Picasso  |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+ 



Reply to: