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

Re: Problem with yesterday's woody update



Jonathan Markevich <jmarkevich@mad.scientist.com> wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 03:07:16PM -0800, kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>> on Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 05:24:17PM +0000, Colin Watson
>(cjw44@flatline.org.uk) wrote:
>> > Bob Nielsen <nielsen@oz.net> wrote:
>> > >Not being conversant in perl, can someone tell me what to do about the
>> > >following error I received after the latest woody updates:
>> 
>> <...>
>> 
>> > I suspect testing is broken (new perl, old debconf). Wait for a newer
>> > debconf to get in, or install the debconf from unstable.
>>                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> This is the fix I used, and recommended by Joey Hess.
>
>Can you suggest how to do this?  I get:
>
>Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies:
>  debconf: Depends: libapt-pkg3.1
>E: Sorry, broken packages
>
>fennywood:/home/jonathan# apt-get install libapt-pkg3.1
>Reading Package Lists... Done
>Building Dependency Tree... Done
>Note, selecting apt instead of libapt-pkg3.1
>Sorry, apt is already the newest version.
>0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 202  not upgraded.
>1 packages not fully installed or removed.
>Need to get 0B of archives. After unpacking 0B will be used.
>Setting up libpaperg (1.0.5) ...
>Can't locate Debconf/Client/ConfModule.pm in @INC (@INC contains:
>/usr/lib/perl5/5.005/i386-linux /usr/lib/perl5/5.005
>/usr/local/lib/site_perl/i386-linux /usr/local/lib/site_perl /usr/lib/perl5
>.) at /var/lib/dpkg/info/libpaperg.config line 3.

You have perl-5.005, so my advice doesn't apply yet (Bob had perl-5.6).
If you haven't upgraded your version of perl yet, don't worry about
debconf until you do. If you're trying to get the libpaperg in testing
installed, though, you might try 'apt-get install perl' first.

All this should be straightened out by the time woody goes stable, I
hope ...

And it's still much easier to understand with dselect. :)

-- 
Colin Watson                                     [cjw44@flatline.org.uk]



Reply to: