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

Re: Aptitude: "1 not upgraded"



Andrei POPESCU grabbed a keyboard and wrote:
> On Mi, 26 iun 13, 07:55:03, David Guntner wrote:
>>
>> So, what's with the "1 not upgraded" message, and how do I find out
>> which one it thinks needs upgrading but isn't acting on?
> 
> aptitude full-upgrade will take care of the second part, for the first 
> part we'd need to see its output.

Ah, ok.  Mystery solved:

> # aptitude full-upgrade
> The following packages will be upgraded:
>   google-chrome-stable{b}
> 1 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
> Need to get 43.3 MB of archives. After unpacking 4,144 kB will be used.
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>   google-chrome-stable: Depends: gconf-service which is a virtual package.
>                         Depends: libgconf-2-4 (>= 2.31.1) which is a virtual package.
>                         Depends: libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0 (>= 2.22.0) which is a virtual package.
>                         Depends: libgtk2.0-0 (>= 2.24.0) but 2.20.1-2 is installed.
>                         Depends: libnspr4 (>= 1.8.0.10) which is a virtual package.
>                         Depends: libnss3 (>= 3.12.6) which is a virtual package.
>                         Depends: libstdc++6 (>= 4.6) but 4.4.5-8 is installed.
>                         Depends: libx11-6 (>= 2:1.4.99.1) but 2:1.3.3-4+squeeze1 is installed.
> The following actions will resolve these dependencies:
> 
>      Remove the following packages:
> 1)     google-chrome-stable
> 
> 
> 
> Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] q
> Abandoning all efforts to resolve these dependencies.
> Abort.
> #

Looks like it's that weird "Google Chrome being held back" thing that
was mentioned recently.

Maybe that particular thing will be solved once I do the upgrade to 7.1.
 Or Google figures out that there's a problem with Chrome and 6.0.7.... :-)

Thanks for the suggestion!

                --Dave


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature


Reply to: