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

Re: Still trying to update to sarge.



On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 05:51:55PM -0400, Spencer wrote:
> Hi again,
> I can't seem to get around, if that's the right way of putting it,
> the error I'm still getting while trying to update to sarge.
> After several hours I always end with this error --
> 
> Preparing to replace nano1.0.6-3 (using .. /archives//nano_1.2.4-2_i386.deb) 
> ..
> update alternative/editor.1: unable to make /usr/man/man1/editor.1.gz.
> dpkg-tmp a smylink to /etc/alternatives/editor.1.gz: No such file or directory

"man update-alternatives" will explain the alternative symlinks in
/etc/alternatives. 

Since  /etc/alternatives/editor.1.gz doesn't seem to exist, you could
just try creating the missing symlink and then restart your
upgrade. On my system I have:

~$ file /etc/alternatives/editor*
/etc/alternatives/editor:      symbolic link to `/usr/bin/vim'
/etc/alternatives/editor.1.gz: symbolic link to `/usr/share/man/man1/vim.1.gz'
~$ file /usr/share/man/man1/editor*
/usr/share/man/man1/editor.1.gz: symbolic link to `/etc/alternatives/editor.1.gz

Simply creating the symlink with ln should get you by this problem;
although the proper way to would be to use update-alternatives to
create the symlink.  


> dpkg: error processing 
> /var/cache/apt/archives/nano_1.2.4-2.i386.deb(--unpack): subprocess
> pre - installation script return error exit status 2
> Errors were encountered while processing: 
> /var/cache/apt/archives/nano_1.2.4-2.i386.deb
> E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1).
> 
> Well, thats the error I get. I have tried to google this, but I get
> no hits and I tried to check the debian archives, still no hit.
> I don't know if timing out several times on my attempts to update
> to sarge is a problem or not. But, when I did time out I would
> just restart the update with - "apt-get -u dist-upgrade".
> Can someone help me with this problem?


-- 
Jerome

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: