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

Re: can't install xfdesktop from unstable



Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: 

> In <[🔎] 20090428131409.036db53e@teksavvy.com>, JoeHill wrote:
> >node1:/home/joehill# aptitude -t unstable install xfdesktop4
> >Reading package lists... Done
> >Building dependency tree
> >Reading state information... Done
> >Reading extended state information
> >Initializing package states... Done
> >Reading task descriptions... Done
> >The following packages are BROKEN:
> >  xfdesktop4
> >The following NEW packages will be installed:
> >  libxfce4menu-0.1-0{a}
> >0 packages upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 433 not upgraded.
> >Need to get 0B/203kB of archives. After unpacking 1090kB will be used.
> >The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> >  xfdesktop4: Depends: xfdesktop4-data (= 4.6.0-2) but it is not
> > installable The following actions will resolve these dependencies:
> >
> >Keep the following packages at their current version:
> >xfdesktop4 [Not Installed]
> >
> >I think what is likely happening is that a new enough xfdesktop simply has
> > not been uploaded to unstable, but I am not sure how to check that :-\  
> 
> apt-cache policy <package_name>
> is what I use to check available versions.

node1:/home/joehill# apt-cache policy xfdesktop4
xfdesktop4:
  Installed: (none)
  Candidate: 4.4.2-7
  Version table:
     4.6.0-2 0
        800 http://debian.yorku.ca unstable/main Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
     4.4.2-7 0
        900 http://debian.yorku.ca testing/main Packages

> I'm seeing xfdesktop4-data=4.6.1-1 in unstable and xfdesktop4-data=4.4.2-7 
> in testing.  I'm also now showing xfdesktop4=4.6.1-1 in unstable and it 
> might be installable--it versioned Depend on xfdesktop4-data is certainly 
> satisfiable.
> 
> Try again?

It's still doing the same thing. But what I'm not clear on is, it almost looks
like it is saying that it wants an _older_ version of xfdesktop4-data...but
then, I'm pretty new at this ;)

-- 
J


Reply to: