digikam upgrade: plugins to be remove
Hello,
On Debian Testing, if I try to upgrade digikam, aptitude wants to remove
digikamimageplugins and kipi-plugins (the actual output is further
below). Now, how do I know why these removals are necessary? And how do
I find out if I should go ahead with the upgrade since, maybe the new
package has the two packages built-in now?
Upgrade output:
--------------------------------------------------------------
$> sudo aptitude -sV dist-upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
Reading extended state information
Initializing package states... Done
Reading task descriptions... Done
Building tag database... Done
The following packages are BROKEN:
libquicktime0 [2:0.9.7-5 -> 2:0.9.10+debian-0.3]
The following NEW packages will be automatically installed:
libkdcraw-runtime [0.1.0-2] libkdcraw0 [0.1.0-2] libkexiv2-1 [0.1.5-1+b1]
The following packages will be automatically REMOVED:
digikamimageplugins [2:0.8.2-4] kipi-plugins [0.1.2-3]
The following NEW packages will be installed:
libkdcraw-runtime [0.1.0-2] libkdcraw0 [0.1.0-2] libkexiv2-1 [0.1.5-1+b1]
The following packages will be REMOVED:
digikamimageplugins [2:0.8.2-4] kipi-plugins [0.1.2-3]
The following packages will be upgraded:
digikam [2:0.8.2-4 -> 2:0.9.2~beta3-1]
2 packages upgraded, 3 newly installed, 2 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 9869kB of archives. After unpacking 17.7MB will be freed.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libquicktime0: Depends: libavcodec1d (>= 0.cvs20070307) which is a
virtual package.
Depends: libavutil1d (>= 0.cvs20070307) which is a
virtual package.
Resolving dependencies...
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:
Keep the following packages at their current version:
digikam [2:0.8.2-4 (now)]
digikamimageplugins [2:0.8.2-4 (now)]
kipi-plugins [0.1.2-3 (testing, testing, testing, now)]
libquicktime0 [2:0.9.7-5 (testing, testing, testing, now)]
Score is -28
Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
thanks,
->HS
Reply to: