Re: upgrade broken (Testing) for 10 days - libxrender
Hi,
On Thu, 8 Apr 2004, Uwe Dippel wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 11:30:17 +0200, Sebastiaan wrote:
>
> > a apt-get dist-upgrade is usually recommended since it also
> > installs/removes packages when the distribution changes. Try that first,
> > see if the problem remains.
>
> # apt-get dist-upgrade
> Reading Package Lists... Done
> Building Dependency Tree... Done
> You might want to run `apt-get -f install' to correct these.
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> libxaw7-dev: Depends: x-dev but it is not installed
> Depends: libxmu-dev but it is not installed
> Depends: libxt-dev but it is not installed
> Depends: libsm-dev but it is not installed
> Depends: libice-dev but it is not installed
> Depends: libxext-dev but it is not installed
> Depends: libx11-dev but it is not installed
> Depends: libxpm-dev but it is not installed
> libxrender-dev: Depends: libxrender1 (= 0.8.3-5) but 0.8.3-7 is installed
> E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
>
> Back at square one. Am I really the only user with this trouble ?? What
> went wrong; I don't remember having clicked or selected anything
> particular. ?
>
sometimes these things happen, not sure how or why. Usually I try to
install the last dependend package explicitly (apt-get install
libxpm-dev), hoping that apt would reveal the reason why it doesn't want
to install that package.
Coming to libxrender-dev: seems libxrender1 depends on a lower version
than installed. You can try to manually download libxrender-dev
version 0.8.3-5 and carefully dpkg --force downgrade --install it (not to
mess up the rest of the packages/dependencies).
Greetz,
Sebas
--
English written by Dutch people is easily recognized by the improper use of 'In principle ...'
The software box said 'Requires Windows 95 or better', so I installed Linux.
Als Pacman in de jaren '80 de kinderen zo had be?nvloed zouden nu veel jongeren rondrennen
in donkere zalen terwijl ze pillen eten en luisteren naar monotone electronische muziek.
(Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, 1989)
Reply to: