Re: Debian Stretch package conflicts... libnettle4 libarchive13 libgnutls-deb0-28 libgnutls30

[Rick Thomas <rbthomas@pobox.com>]

On May 14, 2016, at 3:52 AM, Sven Joachim <svenjoac@gmx.de> wrote:

> On 2016-05-13 18:43 -0700, Rick Thomas wrote:
> 
> 
>> When I try to do aptitude full-upgrade on my Stretch Apple G4 PowerMac, I get conflicts.
>> 
>> These do not seem to be transient — they have been there for several days.
>> 
>> Anybody know what’s going on?
>> 
>>> The following NEW packages will be installed:
>>> libnettle4{a} 
>>> The following packages will be upgraded:
>>> gir1.2-packagekitglib-1.0 libarchive13 libasyncns0 libavcodec57
>>> libavfilter6 libavformat57 libavresample3 libavutil55
>>> libc-bin libc-l10n libc6 libkpathsea6 libpackagekit-glib2-18 libpam-systemd libpostproc54 libptexenc1 librest-0.7-0 
>>> libswresample2 libswscale4 libsynctex1 libsystemd0 libtexlua52 libtexluajit2 libudev1 libx264-148 locales 
>>> multiarch-support mythes-en-us packagekit packagekit-tools systemd systemd-sysv texlive-base texlive-binaries 
>>> texlive-fonts-recommended texlive-fonts-recommended-doc texlive-latex-base texlive-latex-base-doc udev x11-apps 
>>> x11-xkb-utils 
>>> 41 packages upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
>>> Need to get 442 kB/104 MB of archives. After unpacking 16.6 MB will be freed.
>>> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>>> libgnutls-deb0-28 : Conflicts: libnettle4 but 2.7.1-5+deb8u1 is to be installed
>>> libgnutls30 : Conflicts: libnettle4 but 2.7.1-5+deb8u1 is to be installed
>>> open: 45; closed: 112; defer: 39; conflict: 46
>>> 
>>> The following actions will resolve these dependencies:
>>> 
>>>   Keep the following packages at their current version:
>>> 1)     libarchive13 [3.1.2-11+b1 (now, testing, unstable)]
>>> 2)     libnettle4 [Not Installed]                         
> 
> The problem is that libarchive13 has a higher version in stable-security
> than in testing, and that version is not installable in Stretch:
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=823984.
> 
> If you desperately need a fixed libarchive, there's a patch at the end
> of that bug report which you could apply.  Otherwise use
> "aptitude safe-upgrade" instead of "aptitude full-upgrade".
> 
> Cheers,
>       Sven

Thanks, Sven!

I’m glad to hear that it’s a known bug.  I’m perfectly happy to accept the “actions will resolve these dependencies” for the time being.  I guess that’s why they call it “testing”.

I assume that, if I’m patient, a fix will evolve?

Enjoy!
Rick