Re: wheezy, message log being spammed by segfaults from apt_check.py
On Friday 15 January 2016 13:26:09 Charlie Kravetz wrote:
> 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?
No - surprisingly, as of right now, his kernel is not behind, in fact at this
moment he has the same one as I do on my almost stock Wheezy, probably as a
result of blanket installing every available backport a couple of days ago.
(I knowingly and advisedly run a backported kernel). But his machines are
always going to be broken because he makes a point of messing up his system
if at all possible. Why do something the Debian recommended way if there is
a remotely possible other way of doing it?
But Gene said that he has:
ATM,
gene@coyote:~/gaf/charge-pump-bucket$ uname -a
Linux coyote 3.16.0-0.bpo.4-amd64 #1 SMP Debian
3.16.7-ckt20-1+deb8u2~bpo70+1 (2016-01-03) x86_64 GNU/Linux
I have:
lisi@Tux-II:~$ uname -a
Linux Tux-II 3.16.0-0.bpo.4-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 3.16.7-ckt20-1+deb8u2~bpo70+1
(2016-01-03) x86_64 GNU/Linux
lisi@Tux-II:~$
So exactly the same kernel.
Lisi
Reply to: