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

Dependency problems



This is probably the result of a very outdated chroot tarball,
but it's rather disturbing.

---
chroot:/# apt-get install emacs21
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
  bsdmainutils dpkg emacsen-common libfreetype6 libjpeg62 liblockfile1 libpng2
  libtiff3g libungif4g xaw3dg xfree86-common xlibs 
The following packages will be REMOVED:
  sysvinit 
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  bsdmainutils emacs21 emacsen-common libfreetype6 libjpeg62 liblockfile1
  libpng2 libtiff3g libungif4g xaw3dg xfree86-common xlibs 
The following held packages will be changed:
  dpkg 
WARNING: The following essential packages will be removed
This should NOT be done unless you know exactly what you are doing!
  sysvinit (due to dpkg) 
1 packages upgraded, 12 newly installed, 1 to remove and 56  not upgraded.
Need to get 18.0MB of archives. After unpacking 58.5MB will be used.
You are about to do something potentially harmful
To continue type in the phrase 'Yes, do as I say!'
 ?] no
Abort.
---

This same behavior occurs when I try to install emacs20 or 21. If
I agree to removing sysvinit, dpkg is in trouble, because it
doesn't like not having update-rc.d in its path.

Any thoughts on what might be causing this, and/or whether it is
a symptom of something that should be fixed in sid?

Here is the sources.list. I've tried with http.us.d.o in the first
line; no difference.

---
deb http://archive.progeny.com/debian unstable main contrib non-free
deb http://archive.progeny.com/debian-non-US unstable/non-US main contrib non-free

deb-src http://archive.progeny.com/debian unstable main contrib non-free
deb-src http://archive.progeny.com/debian-non-US unstable/non-US main contrib non-free
---

--
John R. Daily                                    Progeny Linux Systems
Consultant                                          jdaily@progeny.com
               Master of the ephemeral epiphany



Reply to: