Re: wheezy, message log being spammed by segfaults from apt_check.py
On Thursday 14 January 2016 23:49:03 Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Thursday 14 January 2016 17:39:59 Johann Klammer wrote:
> > On 01/14/2016 10:50 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > On Thursday 14 January 2016 16:18:08 Johann Klammer wrote:
> > >> Synaptic runs on your box?
> > >> Years ago, when I tried it, it would always crash right on
> > >> startup.... use aptitude. It seems a lot more stable...
> > >
> > > Back on list where it belongs.
> > >
> > > I just ran it, and its obvious it doesn't reference the same
> > > database of installed files that apt and synaptic use. It just now
> > > wanted
> >
> > AFAIK, It does use the same database. Your system seems hosed...
> > Are you running it on the box that the OS is installed on, or on some
> > (boot... ,whatever) client?
>
> Directly on the os and box connected to this keyboard, no vpn's or
> anything else involved.
>
> > > to "upgrade" or sidegrade, 292 packages. Refreshing the list didn't
> > > help but it reminded me of the 4 color screens we had on the amiga's
> > > back in the amigados-1.3 days. Positively an assault on the
> > > eyeballs.
> >
> > press u to update.
>
> I did, didn't affect its faulty judgement a bit. It still wanted to
> update nearly 300 packages.
>
> > > But when an uptodate system is said to have 292 old or defective
> > > packages on it, I'm not sure I want it mucking around in MY used car
> > > lot.
> >
> > what kind of defective? broken? that means the dependencies are not
> > met... Press e to start the interactive resolver.
> > a and r to accept or reject.
>
> I'd have no clue what its doing in the background when I do that. FWIW,
> I had it hose the system on my laptop about 4 years ago with exactly
> this sort of a starting point. I'll pass as its 99.99% working right
> now.
>
> > > For what its worth, as root, an apt-get update, followed by an
> > > apt-get upgrade reports 0 package to upgrade.
> > >
> > > From that it would appear aptitude is confused at best, broken at
> > > worst.
>
> No comment? Seems like the above report does warrant some sort of a
> reply.
Gene, it isn't worthy of a response, so Johann wisely ignored it. Johann -
Gene has wheezy-backports fully enabled in his sources.list, with, so far as
I can tell, the same pinning as the other sources. Synaptic used it to
upgrade over 300 packages. It is probably some kind of kludge, resulting
from this,that Aptitude is trying to sort out.
Gene enjoys breaking his system and then seeing if he can make it run again.
Genuinely. I believe. If it actually ran smoothly he would probably be
bored, and immediately deliberately break it again. He wants to write all his
own scripts, and is frustrated that he is not as good at it as when he was
younger (I can empathise there!!), but uses a GUI package manager which isn't
as good at sorting out problems, and shies away from the CLI. :-/
But, as I say, Aptitude is probably unhappy with a system fully upgraded to
Backports.
>
> > > All of these tools are, AFAIK, supposed to be using the same
> > > sources.list, and the same installed list. update-manager does but
> > > Obviously aptitude is not.
> > >
> > > I believe I'll stick to using synaptic.
>
> +10
Glad you still wholeheartedly agree with yourself, Gene. ;-)
Lisi
Reply to: