apt-get and libpangocairo
The latest upgrade of glibc2 and gconf2 depend on libpangocairo.1.so, which is uninstallable. Where is it? Ed Harrison, Registered Linux User #199533 SuSE 9.3, Kernel 2.6.11 PolarBar Mailer 1.26
On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 15:45 -0400, Ed Harrison wrote:
The latest upgrade of glibc2 and gconf2 depend on libpangocairo.1.so, which is uninstallable.
Where is it?
Try contacting the packager as he/she had to have it available to install their own package. This is the exact reason I stopped using apt-get, many packages are placed in the repositories with out the supporting deps. This leaves the person trying to install the package searching for the elusive dep and banging their head on the wall when they can't find it. Don't get me wrong, apt-get is great when -all- the required packages are available for install. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998
* Ken Schneider <suse-list@bout-tyme.net> [08-14-05 15:16]:
This is the exact reason I stopped using apt-get, many packages are placed in the repositories with out the supporting deps. This leaves the person trying to install the package searching for the elusive dep and banging their head on the wall when they can't find it. Don't get me wrong, apt-get is great when -all- the required packages are available for install.
But this is *not* a failure of apt, you could not install the rpm without "-force" with any system. Apt is merely an application to handle rpm packages. The rpm package is broken by requiring something not available, not the package handler. -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery
On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 15:22 -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Ken Schneider <suse-list@bout-tyme.net> [08-14-05 15:16]:
This is the exact reason I stopped using apt-get, many packages are placed in the repositories with out the supporting deps. This leaves the person trying to install the package searching for the elusive dep and banging their head on the wall when they can't find it. Don't get me wrong, apt-get is great when -all- the required packages are available for install.
But this is *not* a failure of apt, you could not install the rpm without "-force" with any system. Apt is merely an application to handle rpm packages. The rpm package is broken by requiring something not available, not the package handler.
Exactly, the packager is the one at fault -not- the apt-get program. Too many packagers are placing packages in the repositories without making sure the the dependencies are also placed in the repositories for install. This makes apt-get look bad even though it is a good program. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998
On Sun August 14 2005 4:14 pm, Ken Schneider wrote:
This is the exact reason I stopped using apt-get, many packages are placed in the repositories with out the supporting deps. This leaves the person trying to install the package searching for the elusive dep and banging their head on the wall when they can't find it. Don't get me wrong, apt-get is great when -all- the required packages are available for install.
like mine. I installed Freepops ( for yahoo mail, and it works), and a few other apps that are missing some dependencies, yet they still work, and now apt is unable to upgrade. #apt-get upgrade Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done You might want to run `apt-get -f install' to correct these. The following packages have unmet dependencies: freepops: Depends: linux-gate.so.1 but it is not installable freevo_runtime: Depends: libvorbisfile.so.0 but it is not installable glib-devel: Depends: glib (= 1:1.2.10) but 1.2.10-593 is installed gopchop: Depends: mpeg2dec (= 0.4.0) but it is not installed E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f. -- Paul Cartwright Registered Linux user # 367800 X-Request-PGP: http://home.comcast.net/~p.cartwright/wsb/key.asc
* Paul Cartwright <paul_tbot@pcartwright.com> [08-14-05 15:32]:
like mine. I installed Freepops ( for yahoo mail, and it works), and a few other apps that are missing some dependencies, yet they still work, and now apt is unable to upgrade.
#apt-get upgrade Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done You might want to run `apt-get -f install' to correct these. The following packages have unmet dependencies: freepops: Depends: linux-gate.so.1 but it is not installable freevo_runtime: Depends: libvorbisfile.so.0 but it is not installable glib-devel: Depends: glib (= 1:1.2.10) but 1.2.10-593 is installed gopchop: Depends: mpeg2dec (= 0.4.0) but it is not installed E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
Then, if you are otherwise satisfied, deal with them in /etc/apt.apt.conf.d/apt.conf ignore, fake-provides, hold..... man apt.conf -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery
On Sun August 14 2005 4:47 pm, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
freepops: Depends: linux-gate.so.1 but it is not installable freevo_runtime: Depends: libvorbisfile.so.0 but it is not installable glib-devel: Depends: glib (= 1:1.2.10) but 1.2.10-593 is installed gopchop: Depends: mpeg2dec (= 0.4.0) but it is not installed E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
Then, if you are otherwise satisfied, deal with them in /etc/apt.apt.conf.d/apt.conf ignore, fake-provides, hold..... man apt.conf nice, that worked! I added these lines to apt.conf: Ignore {"freepops"; }; Ignore {"freevo_runtime"; }; Ignore {"glib-devel"; }; Ignore {"gopchop"; }; and now apt-get upgrade runs.
-- Paul Cartwright Registered Linux user # 367800 X-Request-PGP: http://home.comcast.net/~p.cartwright/wsb/key.asc
* Paul Cartwright <paul_tbot@pcartwright.com> [08-14-05 16:11]:
nice, that worked! I added these lines to apt.conf: Ignore {"freepops"; }; Ignore {"freevo_runtime"; }; Ignore {"glib-devel"; }; Ignore {"gopchop"; }; and now apt-get upgrade runs.
I always suspected there was a *real* reason for all those "man" pages. Imagine the knowledge which might be gained if the man pages were consulted prior to posing questions in the lists..... -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery
On Sunday 14 Aug 2005 22:14, Patrick Shanahan wrote: <SNIP>
I always suspected there was a *real* reason for all those "man" pages. Imagine the knowledge which might be gained if the man pages were consulted prior to posing questions in the lists.....
The simple fact is that many man pages are cryptic if not downright indecipherable, especially to users who are unused to unix-style technical docs. You might understand every word of every one you ever need to read, and be able to identify the exact one you need spontaneously every time, but that simply isn't true of us mere mortals. <SNIP> -- "The man who strikes first admits that his ideas have given out." (Chinese Proverb)
* Dylan <dylan@dylan.me.uk> [08-14-05 16:38]:
The simple fact is that many man pages are cryptic if not downright indecipherable, especially to users who are unused to unix-style technical docs. You might understand every word of every one you ever need to read, and be able to identify the exact one you need spontaneously every time, but that simply isn't true of us mere mortals.
Are you defending no attempt to use the man pages or not wanting to ask question about what is not understood? Are you also defining mortal as one who fails to understand *all* the man pages, or one who has not tried. I frequently fail to understand some of what I read in the man pages, but also frequently understanding comes with further explanation or trial and error, or questions in the list. *ALL* documentation could be better, but that does not excuse not trying the documentation first. That *is*, AIUI, the reason for documentation. -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery
On Sun August 14 2005 5:47 pm, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
Are you defending no attempt to use the man pages or not wanting to ask question about what is not understood?
Man pages have a use, no question. For the different arguements and options for all the commands they do help.
Are you also defining mortal as one who fails to understand *all* the man pages, or one who has not tried.
I think the only person who understands ALL the man pages is the creator of the OS.
I frequently fail to understand some of what I read in the man pages, but also frequently understanding comes with further explanation or trial and error, or questions in the list.
*ALL* documentation could be better, but that does not excuse not trying the documentation first. That *is*, AIUI, the reason for documentation. I wouldn't have known to look for "man apt.conf" in my wildest dreams, man apt sure. even after looking at man apt.conf I failed to see what I needed, BUT I did vi apt.conf, saw a line with an example and added more lines like it. In this case I learned what to look for from the list and did a
yup, I like that last part, questions to the list. trial and error session. Still the man pages were only PART of a solution and the list was also a part. -- Paul Cartwright Registered Linux user # 367800 X-Request-PGP: http://home.comcast.net/~p.cartwright/wsb/key.asc
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:47:13 -0500 Patrick Shanahan <ptilopteri@gmail.com> wrote:
* Dylan <dylan@dylan.me.uk> [08-14-05 16:38]:
The simple fact is that many man pages are cryptic if not downright indecipherable, especially to users who are unused to unix-style technical docs. You might understand every word of every one you ever need to read, and be able to identify the exact one you need spontaneously every time, but that simply isn't true of us mere mortals.
Are you defending no attempt to use the man pages or not wanting to ask question about what is not understood?
Are you also defining mortal as one who fails to understand *all* the man pages, or one who has not tried.
I frequently fail to understand some of what I read in the man pages, but also frequently understanding comes with further explanation or trial and error, or questions in the list.
*ALL* documentation could be better, but that does not excuse not trying the documentation first. That *is*, AIUI, the reason for documentation.
It is my opinion that man is aimed at those who remember how to do what they want to do, but have forgotten the specific syntax. I know less than that. For me, man has shortcomings: - As this thread illustrates, the user has to know WHAT "name" to ask man about. If he hasn't heard of "name", well ... - man does not distinguish between COMMONLY USED parameters, and those used by specialists. Someone unfamiliar with "name" doesn't know what to pay attention to, vs. what can be skimmed - man normally DOES NOT GIVE EXAMPLES of how commands are used For myself, having read 'man rpm' dozens of times, I have a faint idea of some things 'rpm' can do for me. As a relative newbie, betcha there are things others can use 'rpm' for, that I have NOT LEARNED even with many readings of 'man rpm'. mikus p.s. [BTW, yes I'll use "trial and error" if something is important to understand - but I don't have the energy to apply that to every situation. And answers to questions on the list sometimes lack detail - for example a suggestion to "search on Google" might be more helpful if it said "search on Google for: 'such_and_such' ".]
On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 20:56 -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:47:13 -0500 Patrick Shanahan <ptilopteri@gmail.com> wrote: It is my opinion that man is aimed at those who remember how to do what they want to do, but have forgotten the specific syntax.
I know less than that. For me, man has shortcomings:
- As this thread illustrates, the user has to know WHAT "name" to ask man about. If he hasn't heard of "name", well ...
I have in the past used xman (GUI) to try and find a command. Sometimes it has helped sometimes not.
- man does not distinguish between COMMONLY USED parameters, and those used by specialists. Someone unfamiliar with "name" doesn't know what to pay attention to, vs. what can be skimmed
- man normally DOES NOT GIVE EXAMPLES of how commands are used
For myself, having read 'man rpm' dozens of times, I have a faint idea of some things 'rpm' can do for me. As a relative newbie, betcha there are things others can use 'rpm' for, that I have NOT LEARNED even with many readings of 'man rpm'.
mikus
p.s. [BTW, yes I'll use "trial and error" if something is important to understand - but I don't have the energy to apply that to every situation. And answers to questions on the list sometimes lack detail - for example a suggestion to "search on Google" might be more helpful if it said "search on Google for: 'such_and_such' ".]
Anyone who responds simply with "search the archives" or "search google" helps little. Doing the same with a URL reference helps greatly. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998
I always suspected there was a *real* reason for all those "man" pages. Imagine the knowledge which might be gained if the man pages were consulted prior to posing questions in the lists..... from Nice, to NOT NICE ;( I've read man pages for 20 years. You still have to know what you are looking for, and man apt.conf is not something I would have looked for. And if we were all smart like you and looked everything up in man
On Sun August 14 2005 5:14 pm, Patrick Shanahan wrote: pages, there wouldn't be a need for this list. -- Paul Cartwright Registered Linux user # 367800 X-Request-PGP: http://home.comcast.net/~p.cartwright/wsb/key.asc
* Paul Cartwright <paul_tbot@pcartwright.com> [08-14-05 18:57]:
from Nice, to NOT NICE ;(
Not intended.
I've read man pages for 20 years. You still have to know what you are looking for, and man apt.conf is not something I would have looked for.
I also find man pages sometimes of dubious help. Written by programers for people with programmer knowledge. After all, they are addressing their peers. man -k apt apropos apt
And if we were all smart like you and looked everything up in man pages, there wouldn't be a need for this list. (Now you are being nice?)
I only wish.... But I do learn more by trying to solve my problems myself before asking for help. Looking up things in the man pages and info pages and googling are steps that should be taken before requesting help from the list. cool off, I just emailed you a virtual six-pack of Corona. -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery
On Sun August 14 2005 8:07 pm, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
from Nice, to NOT NICE ;(
Not intended. I don't take being told I'm an idiot cery well, sorry :)
I've read man pages for 20 years. You still have to know what you are looking for, and man apt.conf is not something I would have looked for.
I also find man pages sometimes of dubious help. Written by programers for people with programmer knowledge. After all, they are addressing their peers.
see, my point exactly. **I** am **NOT** their peers, I am a lowly ex-windows user trying to make a nice easy bulletproof home system, so I can show all my buddies that there is an alternative to M$ crap.
man -k apt apropos apt
apropos is a new one on me, is that French? ok, so what does pcap have to do with apt??? # apropos apt pcap (3) - Packet Capture library
And if we were all smart like you and looked everything up in man pages, there wouldn't be a need for this list.
(Now you are being nice?)
probably not.
I only wish.... But I do learn more by trying to solve my problems myself before asking for help.
Looking up things in the man pages and info pages and googling are steps that should be taken before requesting help from the list.
when I try to do an apt-install and it fails from dependencies, yes I have googles,etc, but even then, sometimes, it geets deeper, and deeper, and what you try to add needs more dependencies... or something else breaks. and better thasn 50% of the time someone on this list has already run into that and has a solution.
cool off, I just emailed you a virtual six-pack of Corona.
what, no lime?? thanks! -- Paul Cartwright Registered Linux user # 367800 X-Request-PGP: http://home.comcast.net/~p.cartwright/wsb/key.asc
* Paul Cartwright <paul_tbot@pcartwright.com> [08-14-05 19:24]:
I don't take being told I'm an idiot cery well, sorry :)
I don't believe that you found that in *any* post that I made.
see, my point exactly. **I** am **NOT** their peers, I am a lowly ex-windows user trying to make a nice easy bulletproof home system, so I can show all my buddies that there is an alternative to M$ crap.
No one insinuated that you were a programmer or a programmer's peer. The man pages are generated by the programmer for the most part.
man -k apt apropos apt
apropos is a new one on me, is that French?
dict apropos (in part)
From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 [gcide]:
Apropos \Ap"ro*pos\ ([a^]p"r[-o]*p[=o]), a. & adv. [F. [a] propos; [a] (L. ad) + propos purpose, L. proposium plan, purpose, fr. proponere to propose. See {Propound}.] 1. Opportunely or opportune; seasonably or seasonable. [1913 Webster] A tale extremely apropos. --Pope. [1913 Webster] 2. By the way; to the purpose; suitably to the place or subject; -- a word used to introduce an incidental observation, suited to the occasion, though not strictly belonging to the narration. [1913 Webster]
ok, so what does pcap have to do with apt??? # apropos apt pcap (3) - Packet Capture library
man apropos
when I try to do an apt-install and it fails from dependencies, yes I have googles,etc, but even then, sometimes, it geets deeper, and deeper, and what you try to add needs more dependencies... or something else breaks. and better thasn 50% of the time someone on this list has already run into that and has a solution.
also remember that yast would have had the same problems. Still, solving your own problems tends to stick in your mind/memory better that someone telling you how.
cool off, I just emailed you a virtual six-pack of Corona. what, no lime??
geesh
thanks!
the lime is en-route, but only had two left. -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery
Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Paul Cartwright <paul_tbot@pcartwright.com> [08-14-05 18:57]:
I've read man pages for 20 years. You still have to know what you are looking for, and man apt.conf is not something I would have looked for.
I also find man pages sometimes of dubious help. Written by programers for people with programmer knowledge. After all, they are addressing their peers.
And you already know what you're looking for!
I only wish.... But I do learn more by trying to solve my problems myself before asking for help.
But you have something to start from. I as a part-time unix/linux _user_ for 15 years, am now faced with trying to do system administration on my home system. Suse's defaults do pretty well, but when they don't, the man pages are useless to me -- I look for HOWTO's first, then Google, then the list. For instance, I still have never had an answer to why my usb flash drive (asked about on this list a couple of weeks ago) "refuses to accept address x" when I plug it in, even though the system recognizes it and reads its name and characteristics. None of the above has even mentioned this error message, and it appears to be the only thing between me and my Cruzer (which I finally solved by sharing it from my wife's XP Pro machine). I have no clue where to go from here. No, apropos didn't help. John Perry
Sun, 14 Aug 2005, by ptilopteri@gmail.com:
* Paul Cartwright <paul_tbot@pcartwright.com> [08-14-05 15:32]:
like mine. I installed Freepops ( for yahoo mail, and it works), and a few other apps that are missing some dependencies, yet they still work, and now apt is unable to upgrade.
#apt-get upgrade Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done You might want to run `apt-get -f install' to correct these. The following packages have unmet dependencies: freepops: Depends: linux-gate.so.1 but it is not installable freevo_runtime: Depends: libvorbisfile.so.0 but it is not installable glib-devel: Depends: glib (= 1:1.2.10) but 1.2.10-593 is installed gopchop: Depends: mpeg2dec (= 0.4.0) but it is not installed E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
Then, if you are otherwise satisfied, deal with them in /etc/apt.apt.conf.d/apt.conf ignore, fake-provides, hold..... man apt.conf
I thought the purpose of apt was to remove the burden of having to go through dependency-hell. If using apt means that the user now just has to do other things to make the rpm database happy, then that kindy defeats the point of using it IMNSHO. It certainly doesn't make it any easier than using yast and setting the install-source to some repository like guru's. I've been bitten hard by apt in the past btw, and found that it didn't mix well with yast and diy rpms, but I can't speak for the present. Theo -- Theo v. Werkhoven Registered Linux user# 99872 http://counter.li.org ICBM 52 13 26N , 4 29 47E. + ICQ: 277217131 SUSE 9.2 + Jabber: muadib@jabber.xs4all.nl Kernel 2.6.8 + See headers for PGP/GPG info. Claimer: any email I receive will become my property. Disclaimers do not apply.
* Theo v. Werkhoven <twe-suse.e@ferrets4me.xs4all.nl> [08-14-05 16:26]:
I thought the purpose of apt was to remove the burden of having to go through dependency-hell.
Apt is *just* another tool.
If using apt means that the user now just has to do other things to make the rpm database happy, then that kindy defeats the point of using it IMNSHO. It certainly doesn't make it any easier than using yast and setting the install-source to some repository like guru's.
*No* rpm front end can make up for broken packages and/or missing dependencies or a broken rpm database.
I've been bitten hard by apt in the past btw, and found that it didn't mix well with yast and diy rpms, but I can't speak for the present.
It is not apt that bit you, but rpm packages that were not correctly built, ie: broken. -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery
On Sun August 14 2005 5:24 pm, Theo v. Werkhoven wrote:
I thought the purpose of apt was to remove the burden of having to go through dependency-hell. If using apt means that the user now just has to do other things to make the rpm database happy, then that kindy defeats the point of using it IMNSHO.
I don't use apt on a regulaar basis, I keep my system up-to-date with YOU. THAT SAID, I like to check apt occaissionally just to see what it says...
It certainly doesn't make it any easier than using yast and setting the install-source to some repository like guru's.
I totally agree. -- Paul Cartwright Registered Linux user # 367800 X-Request-PGP: http://home.comcast.net/~p.cartwright/wsb/key.asc
participants (9)
-
Anders Johansson -
Dylan -
Ed Harrison -
John Perry -
Ken Schneider -
mikus＠bga.com -
Patrick Shanahan -
Paul Cartwright -
Theo v. Werkhoven