Re: wheezy, message log being spammed by segfaults from apt_check.py
On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 00:27:19 +0000
Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> wrote:
>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.
>> > >
The answer may be in the above sentence. What does apt-get update,
followed by apt-get dist-upgrade show? upgrade on its own does not
upgrade all packages. It skips kernel and some other stuff. Perhaps
that accounts for the differences?
>> > > 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
>
--
Charlie Kravetz
Linux Registered User Number 425914
[http://linuxcounter.net/user/425914.html]
Never let anyone steal your DREAM. [http://keepingdreams.com]
Reply to: