Re: wheezy, message log being spammed by segfaults from apt_check.py
On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 22:44:07 -0600
David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
>On Thu 14 Jan 2016 at 20:33:45 (-0700), Charlie Kravetz wrote:
>> On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 21:37:49 -0500 Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> wrote:
>> >On Thursday 14 January 2016 21:04:32 Charlie Kravetz wrote:
>> >> 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?
>> >
>> >Will that not update me to Jessie? I'd rather not take that step until a
>> >fresh spin is available from linuxcnc.org, not too long after 16.04 LTS
>> >is out.
>>
>> It will only upgrade if you add or change the /etc/apt/sources.list to
>> include jessie or stable. As long as the sources.list is referring to
>> wheezy only, it will simply upgrade all the packages to the highest
>> level in wheezy. Without it, a bunch of packages will not upgrade, ever.
>>
>> Let's see if anyone else can shed more light on this. I have always
>> used dist-upgrade, because I always wanted all the packages up-to-date.
>> If it is never used, running debian, the kernel has never upgraded and
>> could cause another batch of monkeys running really bad.
>
>Is it worth quoting what Gene has already written in
>https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/01/msg00625.html
>
>"... all 4 machines were installed from
>the same hybride-iso image you can get from linuxcnc.org. Its based on
>debian wheezy, but with a pinned kernel on the other 3 machines, the
>kernels haveing been patched with the RTAI kit for realtime usage. All
>4 machines are running a 3.4-9-rtai-686-pae kernel, which unfortunately
>for this machine, pae doesn't work after the rtai patch, but this is the
>only machine with sufficient (8Gb) memory to make use of the pae.
>
>There is a 3.16-something or other kernel that it wants me to update to,
>and which is installed, but its a 64 bit kernel and linuxcnc will not run
>on a 64 bit kernel for realtime stuff. So I always reboot to the one I
>know works..."
>
>> >> >> > > 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.
>
>Bear in mind the system was broken from day one---by the "broken installer" ;)
>
>> >> > 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
>> >
>> >Cheers, Gene Heskett
>>
>> Charlie Kravetz
>
>Cheers,
>David.
>
So, Gene's machines are always going to behind? He should never run
apt-get dist-upgrade because it will upgrade that kernel, and he
doesn't want that? It's a situation where running dist-upgrade or
aptitude will screw him, right?
--
Charlie Kravetz
Linux Registered User Number 425914
[http://linuxcounter.net/user/425914.html]
Never let anyone steal your DREAM. [http://keepingdreams.com]
Reply to: