On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 06:47:10PM +0000, Lazarus Long wrote: > On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 05:58:46AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > X-No-CC: I subscribe to this list; do not CC me on replies. > > What list? I'm leaving the To: as your Reply-to asked here though. I didn't set that Reply-To, the Debian BTS did. The messages as I send them out have no Reply-To: header. > > > Package: xterm > > > > What version of xterm are you using? > > > > $ dpkg -l xterm > > > > will tell you. > > As I said, it's not xterm specifically, it's "some" X package(s), but the > versions are likely all the same, let's see. xterm was the one you were complaining about, and it's highly useful to report the version you're using of the package against which you're filing a bug. > ii xterm 4.2.1-6 X terminal emulator > > > > Sid, today's dinstall run. > > I figured that was sufficient. The same version of a package isn't always in unstable for all architectures. > > As you can see, the output is just a warning message, and since you saw > > no error messages from Perl, it's likely everything executed just fine. > > So, since you were "which'ing" for readlink, you obviously need it > later. The lack of perl errors shows that it behaved later when needed, > so therefore the dozen or so packages that complained are just "noisy" > not in need of some reinstall or the like? Correct. > > What's interesting is that "which" is failing to find an executable in > > /bin/readlink. > > > > 1) What's your $PATH in a shell with the same environment as the one in > > which you upgraded xterm? > # echo $PATH > /root/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin > > > 2) What are the file permissions on /bin/readlink? > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 3484 Feb 19 03:33 /bin/readlink > > > 3) What's the output of "which readlink" in a shell with the same > > environment as the one in which you upgraded xterm? > # which readlink > bash: which: command not found > > It looks like your shell script was calling a command that doesn't > exist? "which" has been part of debianutils, an Essential package for as far back as I can remember. Probably before 1996. (It's also built-in to many shells.) Did you set up a diversion of /usr/bin/which with dpkg-divert or something? Perhaps you've been experimenting with the (relatively new) "which" *package*, which at first glance has some bug reports that may be germane. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=which At any rate, this does not look like a bug in XFree86 at all. The executables in Essential packages need to Just Work(tm). -- G. Branden Robinson | To Republicans, limited government Debian GNU/Linux | means not assisting people they branden@debian.org | would sooner see shoveled into mass http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | graves. -- Kenneth R. Kahn
Attachment:
pgpSEqDv9gi_b.pgp
Description: PGP signature