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

Latest iceweasel - package kept back



Dear All,

  I'm running a standard squeeze i386 system and regularly do:

apt-get update
apt-get upgrade

Recently there seemed to be a change to the gpg key for the version of
iceweasel that I use and I had to wget the new one.  That's OK.  Now I
get, when I do the upgrade (dist-upgrade in this case):

# apt-get dist-upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Calculating upgrade... Done
The following packages have been kept back:
  iceweasel
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded.

An attempt to reinstall iceweasel produces:

# apt-get --reinstall install iceweasel
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
or been moved out of Incoming.
The following information may help to resolve the situation:

The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 iceweasel : Depends: xulrunner-8.0 (>= 8.0-3~bpo60+1) but it is not
going to be installed
E: Broken packages

So it appears that a new version of xulrunner needs to be installed.
Where can I get this?  Why is it not picked up automatically as a
dependency?  Any help will be appreciated.  The relevant apt
sources.list entries are:

#RJH - for Firefox
deb http://backports.debian.org/debian-backports squeeze-backports main
deb http://mozilla.debian.net/ squeeze-backports iceweasel-release

Thanks for your help.

Cheers,
Rob Hurle
-- 
-----------------------------
Rob Hurle
ANU, College of Asia and the Pacific
School of Culture, History and Language
Histories of Asia and the Pacific
e-mail:              rob1940@gmail.com
Telephone (ANU): +61 2 6125 3169
Mobile (in VN):  +84 948 243 538
Mobile (in OZ):  +61 417 293 603
-----------------------------


Reply to: