Bug#244601: tetex-bin: package fails to configure: Error: `mpost -ini -jobname=metafun -progname=mpost metafun.mp' failed
- To: 244601@bugs.debian.org
- Cc: Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org>
- Subject: Bug#244601: tetex-bin: package fails to configure: Error: `mpost -ini -jobname=metafun -progname=mpost metafun.mp' failed
- From: Frank Küster <frank@debian.org>
- Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 15:54:27 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 87oep3gess.fsf@alhambra.bioz.unibas.ch>
- Reply-to: Frank Küster <frank@debian.org>, 244601@bugs.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <20040420205932.GF11050@preusse-16223.user.cis.dfn.de> (Hilmar Preusse's message of "Tue, 20 Apr 2004 22:59:32 +0200")
- References: <20040419032327.6909C5C05F@necrotic.deadbeast.net> <87llksnrw9.fsf@alhambra.bioz.unibas.ch> <20040420203312.GE21188@deadbeast.net> <20040420205932.GF11050@preusse-16223.user.cis.dfn.de>
Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de> wrote:
> On 20.04.04 Branden Robinson (branden@debian.org) wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 01:12:06PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>
>> > What is the version of tetex-extra?
>>
>> necrotic:~# dpkg -l tetex-extra
>> Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
>> | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
>> |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
>> ||/ Name Version Description
>> +++-============================================-============================================-========================================================================================================
>> pn tetex-extra <none> (no description available)
>>
>> tetex-bin only Suggests: tetex-extra, and should not assume its files are
>> present.
>>
> drachi:[tetex] >dpkg-deb -c tetex-extra_2.0.2-5.1_all.deb | grep metafun.mp
> -rw-r--r-- root/root 1407 2002-10-30 09:41:44 ./usr/share/texmf/metapost/context/base/metafun.mp
> drachi:[tetex] >dpkg-deb -c tetex-base_2.0.2-5.1_all.deb | grep metafun.mp
> drachi:[tetex] >
>
> So then: Where does metafun.mp come from? What is the version of
> tetex-base installed?
I don't know. But:
IT WAS HERE, TOO!
The file from tetex-extra_1.0. was on my system too, although I had
installed tetex-extra_2.0.2.
In fact I cannot be sure that it is really from woody's tetex-extra, but
were else?
My upgrade path was:
- from woody to home-made backports from unstable at the time of 2.0.2-4,
approximately.
- then to Adrian Bunk's bunk-2 backports
- unstable packages since early this year.
Of course I checked again that it does not occur when upgrading from
woody in a pbuilder chroot.
Completely puzzled,
Frank
--
Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie
Reply to: