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

Re: dpkg cache broken after system crash



On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 21:21:47 +0100, Marcio Rosa da Silva
<mrs@myrealbox.com> wrote:
 
> brain:~ 4 # apt-get install linuxdoc-tools
> Reading Package Lists... Done
> Building Dependency Tree... Done
> The following extra packages will be installed:
>   libsp1 sp 
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
>   libsp1 linuxdoc-tools sp 
> 0 packages upgraded, 3 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0  not upgraded.
> Need to get 0B/1894kB of archives. After unpacking 6176kB will be used.
> Do you want to continue? [Y/n] 
> (Reading database ... 
> dpkg: serious warning: files list file for package `libpisock++0'
> missing, assuming package has no files currently installed.
> dpkg: error processing
> /var/cache/apt/archives/libsp1_1.3.4-1.2.1-28_i386.deb (--unpack):
>  failed in buffer_read(fd): files list for package `pilot-link': Is a
> directory
> Errors were encountered while processing:
>  /var/cache/apt/archives/libsp1_1.3.4-1.2.1-28_i386.deb
> Processing was halted because there were too many errors.
> E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)

You could try reinstalling libpisock++0, pilot-link and other packages
for which you get error messages, assuming dpkg is still working. This
should be harmless in any case. You might consider doing a complete
purge before reinstalling.

Perhaps

apt-get remove --purge pilot-link libpisock++0
#ignore package-integrity-related errors you get here

and then 

apt-get install pilot-link libpisock++0 
# and other packages that got removed above 
 
I'd also take a look at the output of 

apt-get -f install

though this is more about dependency checking.

It looks like some Palm-related tools you were using got messed up,
perhaps because they were in use when your system froze. If the above
fails, try reinstalling all your Palm-related tools.

And set up a journalling file system to avoid this happening again.

                                                  Faheem.



Reply to: