Bug#328668: marked as done (openoffice.org2: Can't upgrade from 1.9.121-2 to 1.9.125)
Your message dated Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:02:47 +0200
with message-id <20050916170246.GB10298@rene-engelhard.de>
and subject line Bug#328668: openoffice.org2: Can't upgrade from 1.9.121-2 to 1.9.125
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 16 Sep 2005 16:47:27 +0000
>From A.Kuckartz@ping.de Fri Sep 16 09:47:27 2005
Return-path: <A.Kuckartz@ping.de>
Received: from lilly.ping.de [83.97.42.2]
by spohr.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EGJN0-0001Ig-00; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 09:47:26 -0700
Received: (qmail 31925 invoked from network); 16 Sep 2005 16:47:24 -0000
Received: (ofmipd 85.22.13.53); 16 Sep 2005 16:47:02 -0000
Date: 16 Sep 2005 18:47:23 +0200
Message-ID: <[🔎] 20050916184723.1.31924.qmail@lilly.ping.de>
From: "Andreas Kuckartz" <A.Kuckartz@ping.de>
To: "Debian Bug Tracking System" <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: openoffice.org2: Can't upgrade from 1.9.121-2 to 1.9.125
X-Mailer: reportbug 3.17
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
Package: openoffice.org2
Version: 1.9.121-2
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
It seems to be impossible to upgrade openoffice.org2 from 1.9.121-2 to 1.9.125+2.0beta2-1
Both Synaptic and apt-get install tell me that 1.9.121 is the newest version. I also noticed that openoffice.org2
version 1.9.125+2.0beta2-1 is dependent on openoffice.org2-core (>> 1.9.125) (instead of >= 1.9.125 which I had expected).
Is
1.9.125+2.0beta2-1 >> 1.9.125
?
Did I make any trivial error? (apt pinning?)
Cheers,
Andreas
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.12-3-multimedia-k7
Locale: LANG=de_DE@euro, LC_CTYPE=de_DE@euro (charmap=ISO-8859-15)
Versions of packages openoffice.org2 depends on:
ii openoffice.org2-base 1.9.121-2 OpenOffice.org office suite - data
ii openoffice.org2-calc 1.9.121-2 OpenOffice.org office suite - spre
ii openoffice.org2-core 1.9.121-2 OpenOffice.org office suite archit
ii openoffice.org2-draw 1.9.121-2 OpenOffice.org office suite - draw
ii openoffice.org2-impress 1.9.121-2 OpenOffice.org office suite - pres
ii openoffice.org2-math 1.9.121-2 OpenOffice.org office suite - equa
ii openoffice.org2-writer 1.9.121-2 OpenOffice.org office suite - word
openoffice.org2 recommends no packages.
-- no debconf information
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 328668-done) by bugs.debian.org; 16 Sep 2005 17:03:42 +0000
>From rene.engelhard@gmx.de Fri Sep 16 10:03:41 2005
Return-path: <rene.engelhard@gmx.de>
Received: from mail.gmx.de (mail.gmx.net) [213.165.64.20]
by spohr.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EGJcj-0000xi-00; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 10:03:41 -0700
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 16 Sep 2005 17:03:10 -0000
Received: from dsl-084-056-067-166.arcor-ip.net (EHLO localhost) [84.56.67.166]
by mail.gmx.net (mp020) with SMTP; 16 Sep 2005 19:03:10 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1545045
Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 86EA56A1CE; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:02:47 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:02:47 +0200
From: Rene Engelhard <rene@debian.org>
To: 328668-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#328668: openoffice.org2: Can't upgrade from 1.9.121-2 to 1.9.125
Message-ID: <20050916170246.GB10298@rene-engelhard.de>
References: <[🔎] 20050916184723.1.31924.qmail@lilly.ping.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="s2ZSL+KKDSLx8OML"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] 20050916184723.1.31924.qmail@lilly.ping.de>
X-PGP-Key: 248AEB73
X-PGP-Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
Organization: The Debian Project
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Delivered-To: 328668-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
--s2ZSL+KKDSLx8OML
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
> It seems to be impossible to upgrade openoffice.org2 from 1.9.121-2 to 1.=
9.125+2.0beta2-1
>=20
> Both Synaptic and apt-get install tell me that 1.9.121 is the newest vers=
ion. I also noticed that openoffice.org2=20
> version 1.9.125+2.0beta2-1 is dependent on openoffice.org2-core (>> 1.9.1=
25) (instead of >=3D 1.9.125 which I had expected).
Which is perfectly OK.
> Did I make any trivial error? (apt pinning?)
I am sure. Experimental is pinned at 1 ynway so unless you installed
with -t experimental you won't get the updates automatically.
Anyway, this obviously is *NOT* a bug in the packages.
Closing.
Regards,
Rene
--s2ZSL+KKDSLx8OML
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDKvq2+FmQsCSK63MRAk+oAJ4liPsTTcUcpJ6zehJxDpB9K11YBgCeOuxB
GZdzmb5O7Z5ydlKDryvVU4k=
=1Oyb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--s2ZSL+KKDSLx8OML--
Reply to: