SV: dpkg "out of order" because of ldconfig?
OK, that helped a little - thanks, Eric!
Now I've removed tomcat and downgraded libc6, but still apt-get dist-upgrade
doesn't work. I get the following error message:
Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies:
libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2: Depends: libc6 (>= 2.2.4-2) but 2.1.3-18 is
installed
E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
Here are the libstdc++ packages that are installed (excerpts forn 'dpkg
-l'):
pi libstdc++2.10 2.95.2-13 The GNU stdc++ library
ii libstdc++2.10- 2.95.2-13 The GNU stdc++ library (development files)
ii libstdc++2.10- 2.95.4-0.01100 The GNU stdc++ library
ii libstdc++2.9 2.91.61-1 The GNU stdc++ library (egcs version)
ii libstdc++2.9-g 2.91.66-4 The GNU stdc++ library (old egcs version)
I recall that I upgraded libstdc++2.10 when I installed tomcat. So I guess
that I have to downgrade it again...
But what is the correct version to downgrade to? I tried to use
libstdc++2.9-glibc2.1_2.91.66-4.deb, but that didn't help.
Any idea?
(Please remember to reply to my email-address...)
Regards, Ola Muan
-----Opprinnelig melding-----
>Fra: Eric G. Miller [mailto:egm2@jps.net]
>Sendt: 25. oktober 2001 17:16
>Til: Ola Muan
>Kopi: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>Emne: Re: dpkg "out of order" because of ldconfig?
>
>On Thu, 25 Oct 2001 10:07:08 +0200, Ola Muan <ola.muan@talk2me.no> wrote:
>>
>> So I checked root's PATH, and it was all there, but ldconfig was not
found
>> anywhere. Disappeared. Gone.
>
>ldconfig should be in package libc6.
>>
>> I don't know how it happened and how to fix it. So I'd appreciate any
tips
>> from you guys!
>
>Worst comes to worst, you can try using "ar" to unpack the deb archive for
>libc6 and put ldconfig in /sbin. That may or may not be enough...
>
>--
>Eric G. Miller <egm2@jps.net>
**********************************************************************
This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.
**********************************************************************
Reply to: