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

emdebian-tools problem on lenny (package dependcies from unstable)



Hi,

I've just installed emdebian-tools on a new lenny box (after using it
succesfully in a near-lenny-chroot installed a few months ago)

When I run emsetup I get:

Checking for suitable apt sources.
Checking for /home/mfuzzey and root permissions
Updating main system apt cache (enter your sudo password if prompted).
<snip> (lots of http GETs)
Reading package lists... Done
Checking apt cache data is up to date ...
Cannot find a native gcc for arm.
Trying to locate latest version of gcc for i386.
Running sudo apt-get install - enter your sudo password if prompted.
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
or been moved out of Incoming.
The following information may help to resolve the situation:

The following packages have unmet dependencies:
  gcc-4.3-arm-linux-gnu: Depends: libgomp1 (>= 4.3.3-3) but 4.3.2-1.1
is to be installed
E: Broken packages


emdebian-tools has installed
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/emdebian.sources.list containing:

# The Emdebian toolchain repository
deb http://www.emdebian.org/debian/ unstable main
deb-src http://www.emdebian.org/debian/ unstable main

My system sources list points to a local lenny mirror but I don't
think the local mirror is the problem since lenny contains libgomp1
4.3.2-1.1 according to packages.debian.org.

So the problem seems to be that the emdebian unstable repository is
missing dependencies.

So questions :
1) Is this a bug or a transient problem with the embedian mirror? [I'm
not sure or I would have filed a bug report directly]
2) Why does emdebian add unstable sources? - doesn't this make builds
non reproducable since we will have the "toolchain of the day"?

Regards,

Martin


Reply to: