Bug#665457: tex-common uninstallable due a bashism bug in /usr/sbin/update-texmf
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message
Package: tex-common
Version: 3.4
Severity: grave
I wanted to tag this on sid but unfortunately there is not such a tag in
reportbug.
However, the bug is that there is bashisms in /usr/sbin/update-texmf
leeding to unintallationability of the package and, as there are many
packages depending on tex-common, the whole tex is broken!
/usr/sbin/update-texmf: 77: [: /etc/texmf/texmf.d/96JadeTeX.cnf: unexpected operator
/usr/sbin/update-texmf: 78: [: /etc/texmf/texmf.d/96JadeTeX.cnf: unexpected operator
/usr/sbin/update-texmf: 79: [: /etc/texmf/texmf.d/96JadeTeX.cnf: unexpected operator
/usr/sbin/update-texmf: 80: [: /etc/texmf/texmf.d/96JadeTeX.cnf: unexpected operator
/usr/sbin/update-texmf: 81: [: /etc/texmf/texmf.d/96JadeTeX.cnf: unexpected operator
/usr/sbin/update-texmf: 82: [: /etc/texmf/texmf.d/96JadeTeX.cnf: unexpected operator
/usr/sbin/update-texmf: 83: [: /etc/texmf/texmf.d/96JadeTeX.cnf: unexpected operator
/usr/sbin/update-texmf: 84: [: /etc/texmf/texmf.d/96JadeTeX.cnf: unexpected operator
/usr/sbin/update-texmf: 85: [: /etc/texmf/texmf.d/96JadeTeX.cnf: unexpected operator
/usr/sbin/update-texmf: 86: [: /etc/texmf/texmf.d/96JadeTeX.cnf: unexpected operator
I am not sure if that is the only bug as fixing that do leed to other
errors not finding some tex packages and such.
So more over the whole tex stack is not upgradable at all and only a
complete purge and reinstallation of the relevant packages seems to
help. But then it stumple over the bug above.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (800, 'unstable'), (700, 'stable'), (60, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 3.1.10 (SMP w/8 CPU cores; PREEMPT)
Locale: LANG=de_DE, LC_CTYPE=de_DE (charmap=ISO-8859-1) (ignored: LC_ALL set to de_DE)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Versions of packages tex-common depends on:
ii debconf [debconf-2.0] 1.5.42
ii dpkg 1.16.2
ii ucf 3.0025+nmu2
tex-common recommends no packages.
Versions of packages tex-common suggests:
ii debhelper 9.20120322
Versions of packages texlive-base depends on:
ii debconf [debconf-2.0] 1.5.42
ii dpkg 1.16.2
ii install-info 4.13a.dfsg.1-8
ii libpaper-utils 1.1.24+nmu1
ii luatex 0.70.1-2
ii mime-support 3.52-1
ii texlive-binaries 2011.20120322-1
ii texlive-common 2011.20120322-1
ii texlive-doc-base 2011.20120322-1
ii ucf 3.0025+nmu2
Versions of packages texlive-base recommends:
ii lmodern 2.004.1-5
Versions of packages texlive-base suggests:
ii acroread [pdf-viewer] 9.4.7-0.1
ii ghostscript [postscript-viewer] 9.05~dfsg-4
ii gv [postscript-viewer] 1:3.7.3-1
ii perl-tk 1:804.029-1.2
Versions of packages texlive-binaries depends on:
ii dpkg 1.16.2
ii ed 1.6-1
ii install-info 4.13a.dfsg.1-8
ii libc6 2.13-27
ii libfontconfig1 2.8.0-3.1
ii libfreetype6 2.4.8-1
ii libgcc1 1:4.7.0-1
ii libkpathsea6 2011.20120322-1
ii libpng12-0 1.2.47-1
ii libpoppler13 0.16.7-3
ii libptexenc1 2011.20120322-1
ii libstdc++6 4.7.0-1
ii libt1-5 5.1.2-3.5
ii libx11-6 2:1.4.4-4
ii libxaw7 2:1.0.9-3
ii libxmu6 2:1.1.0-3
ii libxpm4 1:3.5.9-4
ii libxt6 1:1.1.1-2
ii perl 5.14.2-9
ii texlive-common 2011.20120322-1
ii zlib1g 1:1.2.6.dfsg-2
Versions of packages texlive-binaries recommends:
ii luatex 0.70.1-2
ii python 2.7.2-10
ii ruby 4.8
ii ruby1.8 [ruby] 1.8.7.352-2
ii texlive-base 2011.20120322-1
ii tk8.4 [wish] 8.4.19-4
ii tk8.5 [wish] 8.5.11-1
-- debconf information:
texlive-base/texconfig_ignorant:
tex-common/check_texmf_wrong:
texlive-base/binary_chooser: pdftex, dvips, dvipdfmx, xdvi
tex-common/check_texmf_missing:
--
Klaus Ethgen http://www.ethgen.ch/
pub 4096R/4E20AF1C 2011-05-16 Klaus Ethgen <Klaus@Ethgen.de>
Fingerprint: 85D4 CA42 952C 949B 1753 62B3 79D0 B06F 4E20 AF1C
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)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=bbig
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: