RE: can't install skype 4.1 in debian testing ; lost the working 4.0
> Hello,
>
> Is there anyone having luck with skype 4.1 in debian ?
> I have tried to install it and get the following dependency issue and
> also lost my working skype 4.0
>
> `````````````````
> dpkg: warning: overriding problem because --force enabled:
> package architecture (i386) does not match system (amd64)
> (Reading database ... 228508 files and directories currently installed.)
> Preparing to replace skype 4.1.0.20-1 (using skype-install.deb) ...
> Unpacking replacement skype ...
> dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of skype:
> skype depends on libasound2 (>= 1.0.16).
> skype depends on libc6 (>= 2.3.6-6~).
> skype depends on libc6 (>= 2.7).
> skype depends on libgcc1 (>= 1:4.1.1).
> skype depends on libqt4-dbus (>= 4:4.5.3).
> skype depends on libqt4-network (>= 4:4.8.0).
> skype depends on libqt4-xml (>= 4:4.5.3).
> skype depends on libqtcore4 (>= 4:4.7.0~beta1).
> skype depends on libqtgui4 (>= 4:4.8.0).
> skype depends on libqtwebkit4 (>= 2.1.0~2011week13).
> skype depends on libstdc++6 (>= 4.6).
> skype depends on libx11-6.
> skype depends on libxext6.
> skype depends on libxss1.
> skype depends on libxv1.
> skype depends on libssl1.0.0.
>
> dpkg: error processing skype (--install):
> dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
> Processing triggers for desktop-file-utils ...
> Errors were encountered while processing:
> skype
>
> ````````````````````
>
> Any link to download the 4.0 version ?
If you are running 64-bit, you will need to install some 32-bit libraries.
The issue many people are having with Skype on Debian is the multiarch
transition. I think Skype/Microsoft has made changes with 4.1 that address
some multiarch issues while creating others. If this is the case , 4.0 may
not want to install properly, either.
Are you running Squeeze, Wheezy, or sid?
Try this:
#dpkg --add-architectecture i386
#apt-get update
Then try installing 4.1 package again. As I said, you may need to add some
32-bit libraries.
Good luck!
Reply to: