On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 11:18:06AM -0400, Knight Of Staves wrote:
> I apologize for not replying directly in the thread, but I'm still stuck
> with GMail until I deal with another issue and the "Reply to" function
> doesn't seem to be working. (So do you want to deride me for that, as well,
> Sánchez?)
>
My intent was not to deride you. However, you apparently don't learn.
Please refer to the Code of conduct for Debian mailing lists [0]:
"Never send your messages in HTML; use plain text instead."
Also:
"Make sure that you are using the proper list. In particular, don't
send user-related questions to developer-related mailing lists."
That should probably be extended to read "and also don't send
Ubuntu-related questions to Debian mailing lists."
BTW, I won't deride you for using GMail. However, I will gladly point
out to you that I have the courage to at least identify myself. You
apparently like hiding behind your little veil of anonymity.
> On Friday 18 May 2007, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> >On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 03:20:39AM -0400, Knight Of Staves wrote:
> >> I am having a problem with two packages, nvidia-glx-legacy and
> >> nvidia-glx-new (and it's on an upgrade to Ubuntu Feisty -- I tried
> >> a new driver). I tried to remove both of them so I could reinstall
> >> them.
> >
> >$ apt-cache policy nvidia-glx-new
> >W: Unable to locate package nvidia-glx-new
> >
> >The package you are talking about is not even in Debian. Please go
> >ask your question on an Ubuntu list.
>
> By about 4:30 I found the problem. It's not about what package it is, it's
> about dpkg-divert. If you were interested in helping me, instead of judging
> me negatively and "taking someone down" you would have read the whole issue
> and perhaps, instead of being dismissive, you could have actually said
> something helpful. For the record, and for those who Google this list at
> some later time, I'll explain what happened because it could help someone.
>
> In my original e-mail, the one part you didn't quote is the most important
> part:
>
> >> I get a message that it can't install it be installed because the
> diversion
> >> for one library conflicts with the diversion specified in the
> nvidia-glx-new
> >> package.
>
Correct, which is *clearly* a problem with nvidia-glx-new. If you look
at the Debian package, you will see that there is no nvidia-glx-new
package in Debian:
http://packages.debian.org/unstable/source/nvidia-graphics-drivers
However, there is one in Ubuntu:
http://packages.ubuntu.com/feisty/source/linux-restricted-modules-2.6.20
Now, since the Ubuntu maintainer decided to add something that broke
what the maintainer of the upstream Debian package did, your best bet is
to get help from that person.
> That is what's important here. Like most people (I suspect), I've never
> worked much with apt other than just installing and uninstalling. I have
> never heard of dpkg-divert or of diversions before this. A diversion is a
> signal to other packages that a file is not where it would be expected to be
> and tells other packages where to look for that file. (At least that's how
> I understood it.) I kept getting messages that it conflicted with the
> nvidia-glx-new package, so I did this:
>
> dpkg-divert --list *nvidia-glx*
>
> and it gave me a listing of all diversions used in all packages with
> nvidia-glx in their name. I was hesitant to do anything to directly effect
> them, but I was able to use the same command to list any other diversions
> effecting those same files. Fortunately, there weren't any. I figured this
> meant that the only packages using those particular diversions were
> nvidia-glx-legacy, nvidia-glx, and nvidia-glx-new. I used:
>
> dpkg-divert --remove --rename {path and name of file}
>
> for each of the 5 diversions listed. That removed all 5 of them, then I
> tried:
>
> apt-get install nvidia-glx-legacy
>
> and it installed perfectly and worked. Then I removed it, installed
> nvidia-glx, and it worked better. It's now working quite well.
>
Of course, this description is *much* more detailed and something like
this would have probably gotten you a more constructive reply the first
time around.
> >> And please don't respond to me. This is my "spam" account I use
> >> for things likely to create spam, since I can't get to my email
> >> program.
> >
> >Would that be the sort of "spam" created by asking a question about
> >one Distro on another distro's list, while sending your message in
> >HTML on that wrong text-only list and then to top it off sending your
> >message twice? If so, you have succeeded quite nicely.
>
> Uh, no. Actually spam that comes from sites I've had to temporarily join
> for testing situations or something like that which are likely to share my
> e-mail with other sites. And, since you seem more interested in insulting
> me than in helping, I guess I should say that does not include porn sites.
>
In that case, I am very sorry that you are so easily insulted. If fact
I would say that you are clearly not insulted at all, since you persist
in sending HTML mail.
> I hope, in the future, when you're up at 3:30 am, dealing with an issue you
> need to resolve so your system will be ready when you need it by 9 am the
> next day, and you're asking for help from the most knowledgeable group you
> know of, that you will actually get help from those people instead of
> responses from people so myopic they give your problem little thought and
> consider providing a helpful response instead of using the opportunity to
> read only the parts you can be condescending and negative about.
>
> Thank you very much for taking the time and consideration for being so
> helpful to someone who needed it at 3:30 am when they had to have their
> system working early that morning for work instead of taking the chance to
> be petty and insulting.
Well, you didn't bother to take the time and consideration to post the
full error message. Nobody around here is psychic. If it was *really*
that important that you get this machine up and running by 9am, you
would have taken the time to write down the error message and then
posted at least part of it. As it was, your message indicate nothing of
any urgency or seriousness on your part.
Incidentally, if your machine is that important to you, you should
perhaps consider getting a support contract or purchasing a Linux distro
that comes with support.
Regards,
-Roberto
[0] http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature