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

Bug#560975: Upgrade fails due to an error during texlive-binaries/2009-3 package installation



Package: texlive-binaries
Version: 2009-3

Description: Upgrade fails due to an error during texlive-binaries/2009-3 package installation

14:02:55 root@eraser:~# apt-get upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree      
Reading state information... Done
You might want to run `apt-get -f install' to correct these.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
  texlive-base: Depends: texlive-binaries (>= 2009-1) but it is not installed
  texlive-font-utils: Depends: texlive-binaries (>= 2009-1) but it is not installed
E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
14:02:59 root@eraser:~# apt-get -f install
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree      
Reading state information... Done
Correcting dependencies... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
  texlive-binaries
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  texlive-binaries
0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 126 not upgraded.
12 not fully installed or removed.
Need to get 0B/7,421kB of archives.
After this operation, 16.7MB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? y
(Reading database ... 134743 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking texlive-binaries (from .../texlive-binaries_2009-3_i386.deb) ...
dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/texlive-binaries_2009-3_i386.deb (--unpack):
 trying to overwrite '/usr/share/man/man1/ttf2pk.1.gz', which is also in package freetype1-tools 0:1.4pre.cvs20060210-1
dpkg-deb: subprocess paste killed by signal (Broken pipe)
Processing triggers for man-db ...
Errors were encountered while processing:
 /var/cache/apt/archives/texlive-binaries_2009-3_i386.deb
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)

14:06:09 root@eraser:~# uname -a
Linux eraser 2.6.32-0.slh.8-sidux-686 #1 SMP PREEMPT Fri Dec 11 14:06:28 UTC 2009 i686 GNU/Linux


--
Only the best is good enough...

Reply to: