Kynn Jones wrote: > I try to keep my system as close to 100% stable as possible. In spite > of this, a version of libp11-kit0 that is ahead of stable "somehow" > snuck into my system: > > $ apt-cache policy libp11-kit0 > libp11-kit0: > Installed: 0.20.7-1~bpo70+1 > Candidate: 0.20.7-1~bpo70+1 > Version table: > *** 0.20.7-1~bpo70+1 0 > 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status > 0.12-3 0 > 500 http://debian.csail.mit.edu/debian/ stable/main amd64 Packages > 500 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ stable/main amd64 Packages I went back and looked at your previous messages to the list. I see this from you previously: > As part of a work-related requirement, I need to install ia32-libs on > my (mostly stable) Debian laptop. > > Unfortunately, it turns out that ia32-libs conflicts, indirectly, with > *the one lone package* that I have explicitly installed from a Debian > release other than stable, namely emacs24-lucid from wheezy-backports. > > The immediate cause of the conflict is the package libp11-kit0, but > the full dependency chain goes like this: > > emacs24-lucid depends on libgnutls-deb0-28 (>= 3.3.0) depends on libp11-kit0 (>= 0.20.7) There you go! It wasn't "somehow". It was installed as an explicit installation by you when you installed it from backports. Everything makes perfect sense. Before downgrading it you would need to remove the emacs24-lucid backport that you installed that pulled it in first. Along with the other dependencies too. On the other hand you say you want emacs24-lucid from backports. In which case that means you also want libp11-kit0 from backports to supply the dependency for it too. Seems reasonable to me. Keep it! :-) Bob
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature