The electric power went out in my building overnight while I was asleep, having left my laptop running, and when I awoke I couldn't boot it up again, but was forced to reinstall my system. (And here was I just congratulating myself on having gone about 8 months without any major changes, much less disasters.)
My installation did not go well. Maybe it's because I hadn't done it in awhile; as well as the fact that I am too busy to be bothered with this crap just now, yet I still need a working machine in order to keep my life together. In all, I think I tried 11 times (yes, eleven!) to get my system reinstalled and reconfigured. It doesn't go so well when there are other important matters that also claim my attention.
The problems with reinstallation do not seem to involve Trinity as such. For some unknown reason, the XFCE desktop has messed up my settings, so that I was unable to find my network, etc.; so instead, I used MATE to finish the installation, then installed my TDE packages. After I got to that stage, I was back in familiar territory, and all seemed to be going well....
Anyway, so I got it up and running, everything looks right, just finishing up, installing all those other packages that can wait.
And now, I get this weird error message:
sudo apt-get -f install apt-get: symbol lookup error: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libapt-private.so.0.0: undefined symbol: _ZN11pkgDepCache24IncreaseActionGroupLevelEv, version APTPKG_6.0
I don't know what this means, and I am unable to use apt utilities, apt-get, aptitude, etc. I can still install packages using dpkg, but without knowing how to solve this problem, it seems pointless to keep on trying to make it work.
After 11 attempts at reinstallation throughout today, I am at my wits' end, and really do not want to undertake yet another reinstallation. If anybody knows of a way to solve this issue, I will be for ever grateful.
Bill
Hi Bill!
Anno domini 2024 Sat, 13 Jul 00:44:10 -0700 William Morder via tde-users scripsit:
The electric power went out in my building overnight while I was asleep, having left my laptop running, and when I awoke I couldn't boot it up again, but was forced to reinstall my system. (And here was I just congratulating myself on having gone about 8 months without any major changes, much less disasters.)
If the power loss causes you to reinstall the system then most likely you have a faulty hardware :(
My installation did not go well. Maybe it's because I hadn't done it in awhile; as well as the fact that I am too busy to be bothered with this crap just now, yet I still need a working machine in order to keep my life together. In all, I think I tried 11 times (yes, eleven!) to get my system reinstalled and reconfigured. It doesn't go so well when there are other important matters that also claim my attention.
The problems with reinstallation do not seem to involve Trinity as such. For some unknown reason, the XFCE desktop has messed up my settings, so that I was unable to find my network, etc.; so instead, I used MATE to finish the installation, then installed my TDE packages. After I got to that stage, I was back in familiar territory, and all seemed to be going well....
Anyway, so I got it up and running, everything looks right, just finishing up, installing all those other packages that can wait.
And now, I get this weird error message:
sudo apt-get -f install apt-get: symbol lookup error: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libapt-private.so.0.0: undefined symbol: _ZN11pkgDepCache24IncreaseActionGroupLevelEv, version APTPKG_6.0
I don't know what this means, and I am unable to use apt utilities, apt-get, aptitude, etc. I can still install packages using dpkg, but without knowing how to solve this problem, it seems pointless to keep on trying to make it work.
Oh oh ... your installed apt library is failty. I suspect eiter your harddrive is failing - or you mainboard has an issue - or your ram is faulty. What does "dmesg -w" say when you do stuff?
After 11 attempts at reinstallation throughout today, I am at my wits' end, and really do not want to undertake yet another reinstallation. If anybody knows of a way to solve this issue, I will be for ever grateful.
If you feel up to an adventure you could try my devuan ceres liveiso + installer. It's based on refracta and comes with all the firmware blobs you might need (and TDE): ISO: https://samhain.at/devuan_tde/ceres-20240326.iso SHA256: 1a99aac13d08df5949ba4ad410dfbbc8bc35bcff6a9a55d9b4cd48fd6a12e957
I haven't uploaded the lastest version yet (dark theme not done yet), so it's still from 2024/04/04 but should do. At least you can figure out what's going on with your system. Oh, you might want to select englisch localisation in the boot menu (default is DE, the 3rd option is RU).
Nik
Bill
tde-users mailing list -- users@trinitydesktop.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@trinitydesktop.org Web mail archive available at https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskto...
-- Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA, CIA ...
On Saturday 13 July 2024 02:18:22 Dr. Nikolaus Klepp via tde-users wrote:
dmesg -w
Hi, Nik!
For some reason, your text did not come through; however, I assume that you know what you wrote.
The output is very long. I am not sure what to look for. There are some warnings about missing firmware, but then I have never used any of the non-free packages for internet (if that's what it's about), and my internet has always been just fine.
If you want the whole output, I can append it, or send it to you by private email.
Bill
Anno domini 2024 Sat, 13 Jul 02:37:36 -0700 William Morder via tde-users scripsit:
On Saturday 13 July 2024 02:18:22 Dr. Nikolaus Klepp via tde-users wrote:
dmesg -w
Hi, Nik!
For some reason, your text did not come through; however, I assume that you know what you wrote.
Well, sometimes I even remember :)
The output is very long. I am not sure what to look for. There are some warnings about missing firmware, but then I have never used any of the non-free packages for internet (if that's what it's about), and my internet has always been just fine.
If you want the whole output, I can append it, or send it to you by private email.
You'd look for lines containing error or really weird formated sections from kernel modules crashing or stuff like /dev/sda timout or something like that.
Nik
Bill ____________________________________________________ tde-users mailing list -- users@trinitydesktop.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@trinitydesktop.org Web mail archive available at https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskto...
-- Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA, CIA ...
On Saturday 13 July 2024 03:17:10 Dr. Nikolaus Klepp via tde-users wrote:
Anno domini 2024 Sat, 13 Jul 02:37:36 -0700
William Morder via tde-users scripsit:
On Saturday 13 July 2024 02:18:22 Dr. Nikolaus Klepp via tde-users wrote:
dmesg -w
You'd look for lines containing error or really weird formated sections from kernel modules crashing or stuff like /dev/sda timout or something like that.
Nik
Aside from the warnings about missing firmware, I can find nothing that seems unusual.
My hard drive partitions do not follow the sda (etc.) format, but are rather like this: nvme0n1p2, nvme0n1p3, etc.
I am beginning to think that I will have to try another reinstallation, but it will have to wait until tomorrow evening sometime. In the meanwhile, I'll keep looking for a way to solve the problem like this.
And by the way, my laptop is only about two years old, and I bought a 2 tb SSD to put in it. That hard drive is very full, though, because I've been busy, and haven't had time to sit and transfer files to external drives, or to delete the excess. Could that be the problem? that the hard drive is too full? (Seriously, a 2 tb hard drive, with maybe 30 gb left! I have the space on external drives, just no time.)
As for the offer of your system image, I did try one of them before, but the Refracta installer doesn't work so well for me. I know we both run Devuan, but we do things differently. I would, however, like to create an image of my own system, for times just like this.
Bill
Am on a tablet running ProtonMail, so I can't readily bottom post. But I saw that this involves SSDs, and thought it worth mentioning that SSDs are notorious for failing as a result of blackouts. If you look around you will find the exact mechanism; it usually involves the power dying while a write is underway.
It happened to me this spring during my RPi build-a-television project. Brand new 1tb SSD, literally just out of the box and checked. Was copying Debian install from the SD card to SSD. Power merely glitched, maybe a second. That was all it took. SSD was stone dead. Fortunately, Crucial replaced it. And I got small UPSes for every machine that has an SSD.
They're pretty delicate. And their failure modes are non-obvious. I spent several days trying to resurrect mine before giving up.
dep Pictures: http://www.ipernity.com/doc/depscribe/album Column: https://ofb.biz/author/dep/
On Saturday 13 July 2024 13:41:35 dep via tde-users wrote:
Am on a tablet running ProtonMail, so I can't readily bottom post. But I saw that this involves SSDs, and thought it worth mentioning that SSDs are notorious for failing as a result of blackouts. If you look around you will find the exact mechanism; it usually involves the power dying while a write is underway.
It happened to me this spring during my RPi build-a-television project. Brand new 1tb SSD, literally just out of the box and checked. Was copying Debian install from the SD card to SSD. Power merely glitched, maybe a second. That was all it took. SSD was stone dead. Fortunately, Crucial replaced it. And I got small UPSes for every machine that has an SSD.
They're pretty delicate. And their failure modes are non-obvious. I spent several days trying to resurrect mine before giving up.
dep
Yeah, and not just SSDs. I had a regular old spinning hard drive that got killed like that, although it was a more severe case. I was copying files from one hard drive to another for backup, and the power went out. Two birds were killed with one stone.
I lost everything, all that data, including 40 years of field research, only some of which I have in hard copy (and those hard copies are buried away in files in storage).
If you or anybody else could recommend some good UPS for backups of my machines, that would be a great help. I used to have one back in the days of desktop computers (and I do still have a desktop, in storage), but now with laptops and tablets and smartphones trying to take over the world, the power backup solutions are getting hard to find. Or maybe things are just changing too fast, and I am too old and slow to catch on.
Bill
William Morder composed on 2024-07-14 09:45 (UTC-0700):
If you or anybody else could recommend some good UPS for backups of my machines, that would be a great help. I used to have one back in the days of desktop computers (and I do still have a desktop, in storage), but now with laptops and tablets and smartphones trying to take over the world, the power backup solutions are getting hard to find. Or maybe things are just changing too fast, and I am too old and slow to catch on.
Based on the catalog listings of UPS replacement batteries, UPS model numbers must change at least every month, if not every week. Tripp-Lite made the last two I bought for computer use, 1500VA each, which are still working, while most recent is an APC 450VA for bedroom TV & Roku. Last to die here was an Eaton. Most to die here in last two decades have been APC. Florida is hard on them. https://www.thefloridaagents.com/is-florida-the-lightning-capital-of-the-wor...
On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 13:15:33 -0400 Felix Miata via tde-users users@trinitydesktop.org wrote:
William Morder composed on 2024-07-14 09:45 (UTC-0700):
If you or anybody else could recommend some good UPS for backups of my machines, that would be a great help. I used to have one back in the days of desktop computers (and I do still have a desktop, in storage), but now with laptops and tablets and smartphones trying to take over the world, the power backup solutions are getting hard to find. Or maybe things are just changing too fast, and I am too old and slow to catch on.
Based on the catalog listings of UPS replacement batteries, UPS model numbers must change at least every month, if not every week. Tripp-Lite made the last two I bought for computer use, 1500VA each, which are still working, while most recent is an APC 450VA for bedroom TV & Roku. Last to die here was an Eaton. Most to die here in last two decades have been APC. Florida is hard on them. https://www.thefloridaagents.com/is-florida-the-lightning-capital-of-the-wor...
For what it's worth, I think APC was also the brand of the UPS that, sometime before the pandemic, caused the first people to arrive at my employer's offices one Monday morning to find the building filled with smoke. (We never did find out exactly why—I think it was left in the back parking lot until it stopped smoking, then junked.) So maybe be careful of those.
E. Liddell
[quote]
If you or anybody else could recommend some good UPS for backups of my machines, that would be a great help. I used to have one back in the days of desktop computers (and I do still have a desktop, in storage), but now with laptops and tablets and smartphones trying to take over the world, the power backup solutions are getting hard to find. Or maybe things are just changing too fast, and I am too old and slow to catch on.
[/quote]
(Again on tablet. Pixel running GrapheneOS in case anyone is interested.)
In my experience the best UPS devices are heavy, because they contain good old lead-acid batteries. A hint is that the specs say the battery can be replaced. (Which I have done. It's easy.)
It varies, but around here the nature of power failures is frequently a very quick glitch. Sometimes numerous glitches, on and off 20 times in very rapid succession. So my primary goal has been to shield against that, with the secondary objective of allowing for orderly shutdown when the power goes out for some time. This does not require a UPS the size of a refrigerator. I do not plan on using the computers off the UPS except for those purposes and for keeping them running until I can get the generator started.
There is software that is supposed to monitor the computer and UPS and perform an orderly shutdown once the battery is drained to a certain level. I have tried this and have not found it reliable. The Linux versions seem to be poorly tested afterthoughts.
The ones I got this year for the TV projects are, as Amazon describes them, "APC UPS Battery Backup & Surge Protector, 600VA Backup Battery Power Supply, BE600M1 Back-UPS with USB Charging Port." Cost $80. The beeping can be turned off -- no power is irritating enough; no need to have a beep designed to annoy going off every few seconds.
dep Pictures: http://www.ipernity.com/doc/depscribe/album Column: https://ofb.biz/author/dep/
-------- Original Message -------- On 7/14/24 12:45, William Morder via tde-users users@trinitydesktop.org wrote:
On Saturday 13 July 2024 13:41:35 dep via tde-users wrote:
Am on a tablet running ProtonMail, so I can't readily bottom post. But I saw that this involves SSDs, and thought it worth mentioning that SSDs are notorious for failing as a result of blackouts. If you look around you will find the exact mechanism; it usually involves the power dying while a write is underway.
It happened to me this spring during my RPi build-a-television project. Brand new 1tb SSD, literally just out of the box and checked. Was copying Debian install from the SD card to SSD. Power merely glitched, maybe a second. That was all it took. SSD was stone dead. Fortunately, Crucial replaced it. And I got small UPSes for every machine that has an SSD.
They're pretty delicate. And their failure modes are non-obvious. I spent several days trying to resurrect mine before giving up.
dep
Yeah, and not just SSDs. I had a regular old spinning hard drive that got killed like that, although it was a more severe case. I was copying files from one hard drive to another for backup, and the power went out. Two birds were killed with one stone.
I lost everything, all that data, including 40 years of field research, only some of which I have in hard copy (and those hard copies are buried away in files in storage).
If you or anybody else could recommend some good UPS for backups of my machines, that would be a great help. I used to have one back in the days of desktop computers (and I do still have a desktop, in storage), but now with laptops and tablets and smartphones trying to take over the world, the power backup solutions are getting hard to find. Or maybe things are just changing too fast, and I am too old and slow to catch on.
Bill ____________________________________________________ tde-users mailing list -- users@trinitydesktop.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@trinitydesktop.org Web mail archive available at https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskto...
Hi Bill,
13.Jul.2024 at 00:44 you wrote:
After 11 attempts at reinstallation throughout today, I am at my wits' end, and really do not want to undertake yet another reinstallation. If anybody knows of a way to solve this issue, I will be for ever grateful.
In case of a demolished system I simply start my backup-program - timeshift to be exact - and let it install one of my previously made backups. 10 minutes and I'm up and running flawlessly again.
Regards, Peter.
On Sat, Jul 13, 2024 at 12:44:10AM -0700, William Morder via tde-users wrote:
My installation did not go well. Maybe it's because I hadn't done it in awhile; as well as the fact that I am too busy to be bothered with this crap just now, yet I still need a working machine in order to keep my life together. In all, I think I tried 11 times (yes, eleven!) to get my system reinstalled and reconfigured. It doesn't go so well when there are other important matters that also claim my attention.
What happens if you just install everything according to the defaults, without your customisations? Does it still break?
The problems with reinstallation do not seem to involve Trinity as such. For some unknown reason, the XFCE desktop has messed up my settings, so that I was unable to find my network, etc.;
Are you suggesting that *out of the box* the installer installs XFCE settings that are broken? And has done so eleven times in a row?
Where are you getting the installer from? Is the media faulty?
And now, I get this weird error message:
sudo apt-get -f install apt-get: symbol lookup error: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libapt-private.so.0.0: undefined symbol: _ZN11pkgDepCache24IncreaseActionGroupLevelEv, version APTPKG_6.0
Googling finds:
https://askubuntu.com/questions/1469908/error-apt-symbol-lookup-error-lib-x8...
https://serverfault.com/questions/246613/suddenly-get-apt-get-symbol-lookup-...
But honestly if you have installed the system from scratch eleven times, and get this error each time, that suggests your installer is broken, or you are starting to suffer hardware issues.
On Saturday 13 July 2024 06:17:43 Steven D'Aprano via tde-users wrote:
On Sat, Jul 13, 2024 at 12:44:10AM -0700, William Morder via tde-users
wrote:
What happens if you just install everything according to the defaults, without your customisations? Does it still break?
Actually, I don't "customize" until I get into the Trinity Desktop; and then, yes, I have been known to do a bit of customization. Maybe even more than just a bit.
The problem is that whatever I do in XFCE gets saved as a session, even though I did not wish to save it. I would rather that XFCE just stays plain vanilla; not because I like it, but because I would rather not have this mess.
If I have some time later this evening, I will try to track down any configuration settings for XFCE, and delete (or at least rename) those folders, and maybe that will restore XFCE to normal.
The problems with reinstallation do not seem to involve Trinity as such. For some unknown reason, the XFCE desktop has messed up my settings, so that I was unable to find my network, etc.;
Are you suggesting that *out of the box* the installer installs XFCE settings that are broken? And has done so eleven times in a row?
No, I did not say that. The installation never completed properly, so that I cannot boot into the new system. Only this last time, it finally completed, and I could boot into the new system, then finish installing my TDE packages. And everything seemed to be going fine, all looked normal, until this happened. If I recall, I was trying to install some text editors. Nothing special, I have done this a thousand times, probably in my sleep a few times, and never had any problems like this.
Installations in general have been getting weird, even though, once installed, I rarely need to reinstall or make any major changes. As I said earlier, it has been about 8 months since I last had to reinstall my system.
Where are you getting the installer from? Is the media faulty?
And now, I get this weird error message:
sudo apt-get -f install apt-get: symbol lookup error: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libapt-private.so.0.0: undefined symbol: _ZN11pkgDepCache24IncreaseActionGroupLevelEv, version APTPKG_6.0
Googling finds:
https://askubuntu.com/questions/1469908/error-apt-symbol-lookup-error-lib-x 86-64-linux-gnu-libapt-private-so-0-0-und
https://serverfault.com/questions/246613/suddenly-get-apt-get-symbol-lookup -error-when-using-apt-get
But honestly if you have installed the system from scratch eleven times, and get this error each time, that suggests your installer is broken, or you are starting to suffer hardware issues.
I don't get this same error each time; only got it the last time, when at last I succeeded in getting the system installed.
Part of this may be due to other factors: the power going out in the middle of the night, so that the machine shut down when I wasn't aware what was happening, and the internet has been unstable now for maybe 6 months, but I have no control over that.
Thanks for the links. That was my next step, before I attempt anything more, and it will have to wait until this evening.
Bill
On Sat July 13 2024 00:44:10 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
The electric power went out in my building overnight while I was asleep, having left my laptop running, and when I awoke I couldn't boot it up again, but was forced to reinstall my system. (And here was I just congratulating myself on having gone about 8 months without any major changes, much less disasters.)
My installation did not go well. Maybe it's because I hadn't done it in awhile; as well as the fact that I am too busy to be bothered with this crap just now, yet I still need a working machine in order to keep my life together. In all, I think I tried 11 times (yes, eleven!) to get my system reinstalled and reconfigured. It doesn't go so well when there are other important matters that also claim my attention.
The problems with reinstallation do not seem to involve Trinity as such. For some unknown reason, the XFCE desktop has messed up my settings, so that I was unable to find my network, etc.; so instead, I used MATE to finish the installation, then installed my TDE packages. After I got to that stage, I was back in familiar territory, and all seemed to be going well....
Anyway, so I got it up and running, everything looks right, just finishing up, installing all those other packages that can wait.
And now, I get this weird error message:
sudo apt-get -f install apt-get: symbol lookup error: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libapt-private.so.0.0: undefined symbol: _ZN11pkgDepCache24IncreaseActionGroupLevelEv, version APTPKG_6.0
I don't know what this means, and I am unable to use apt utilities, apt-get, aptitude, etc. I can still install packages using dpkg, but without knowing how to solve this problem, it seems pointless to keep on trying to make it work.
Hi Bill,
I cannot tell you how that file became corrupt but that is something you need to look at yourself. If your hardware is failing it may not be worth trying more installs.
This kind of problem can be fixed by using a web browser, or even a FTP client if a web browser won't run, or even by downloading on another machine and then transferring via a USB stick or other removable media. You will download appropriate version of the apt package from Debian or Ubuntu or whichever distro you are using.
"dpkg -s apt | head" will tell you the apt version and architecture you need to download.
Once downloaded you can install it using dpkg.
This works for most broken packages unless you break something essential like dpkg or libc.
For example, if I needed to fix my Debian apt I would browse to "http://ftp.debian.org/debian/" and then click down through pool, main, a, apt, and then download apt_2.6.1_amd64.deb but you may be using a different distro, version, or architecture.
--Mike
On Saturday 13 July 2024 10:01:04 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
dpkg -s apt | head
Okay, so I ran that command, and here is my output:
Package: apt Status: install ok unpacked Priority: important Section: admin Installed-Size: 4224 Origin: Devuan Maintainer: Andreas Messer andi@bastelmap.de Architecture: amd64 Version: 2.6.1devuan1 Replaces: apt-transport-https (<< 1.5~alpha4~), apt-utils (<< 1.3~exp2~)
I don't know if this means anything to you. If there is something that I ought to upgrade, replace, add dependencies or recommends, etc., I would be glad to know. I am searching through Devuan now for more information.
Bill
On Sun July 14 2024 10:21:55 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
On Saturday 13 July 2024 10:01:04 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
dpkg -s apt | head
Okay, so I ran that command, and here is my output:
Package: apt Status: install ok unpacked Priority: important Section: admin Installed-Size: 4224 Origin: Devuan Maintainer: Andreas Messer andi@bastelmap.de Architecture: amd64 Version: 2.6.1devuan1 Replaces: apt-transport-https (<< 1.5~alpha4~), apt-utils (<< 1.3~exp2~)
I don't know if this means anything to you. If there is something that I ought to upgrade, replace, add dependencies or recommends, etc., I would be glad to know. I am searching through Devuan now for more information.
Hi Bill,
Here is the original of the package that is broken on your system. The distro, package name, version, and architecture match your broken package. http://mirrors.dotsrc.org/devuan/devuan/pool/main/a/apt/apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd... You need to download this and then install it with dpkg.
You could use a web browser or an ftp client or a series of commands like this, depending upon what you have available.
cd /tmp wget http://mirrors.dotsrc.org/devuan/devuan/pool/main/a/apt/apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd... dpkg -i apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64.deb
Just in case that wrapped, there should be a space after the wget, not a newline.
--Mike
On Saturday 13 July 2024 10:01:04 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
"dpkg -s apt | head" will tell you the apt version and architecture you need to download.
Once downloaded you can install it using dpkg.
This works for most broken packages unless you break something essential like dpkg or libc.
For example, if I needed to fix my Debian apt I would browse to "http://ftp.debian.org/debian/" and then click down through pool, main, a, apt, and then download apt_2.6.1_amd64.deb but you may be using a different distro, version, or architecture.
--Mike
I found that page for Debian, and it is *almost* exactly what I need; almost, that is, except I run Devuan.
There is a page for Debian package search (https://packages.debian.org/index), and I used to use it all the time, back when I was a Debian user.
Now I keep trying to find the corresponding page in Devuan, but the URL address doesn't follow quite the same pattern. I have found it, saved it, maybe a couple dozen times, and somehow it keeps vanishing on me.
If anybody knows the page for Devuan package search, that would be a great help. Neither apt nor aptitude nor any other work for me at present, until I solve this other problem (for which, see previous posts under this thread).
Also, aptitude itself, while impressive, and useful to others, is not much use to me, as it keeps trying to uninstall my Open Office (as well as, if I recall, some other programs that I use pretty regularly). It would be nice if aptitude gave users more control, as in apt or apt-get. I still use it for searching and finding more information, but not for actual installation.
I don't know if this will solve my problem, though, as I already save all my downloaded and installed packages (for situations just like this), and everything seems up-to-date.
Bill
On Sun July 14 2024 10:41:28 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
I don't know if this will solve my problem, though, as I already save all my downloaded and installed packages (for situations just like this), and everything seems up-to-date.
If you have a saved copy of your "apt" package you can just reinstall it with "dpkg -i ..." without downloading it again.
--Mike
On Sunday 14 July 2024 10:51:07 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
On Sun July 14 2024 10:41:28 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
I don't know if this will solve my problem, though, as I already save all my downloaded and installed packages (for situations just like this), and everything seems up-to-date.
If you have a saved copy of your "apt" package you can just reinstall it with "dpkg -i ..." without downloading it again.
--Mike
Okay, so progress is sometimes made in baby steps, and I hope this is some progress.
I used dpkg to purge all the apt-* type packages in my system, to wit:
sudo dpkg --purge --force-all apt-transport-https apt-utils apt-file_3.3_all apt-mirror_0.5.4-2_all apt-transport-https_2.6.1devuan1_all apt-utils_2.6.1devuan1_amd64 apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64 aptitude-common_0.8.13-5_all aptitude_0.8.13-5_amd64 devuan-apt-mirror-config-override_2.6_all dpkg-repack_1.52_all libapt-pkg-perl_0.1.40+b2_amd64 synaptic_0.91.3_amd64 apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64
Then I figured that I would reinstall them one-at-a-time, using dpkg, or moving to apt, aptitude, whatever, to finish up.
I already had the package you named, but I thought, well, let's download a fresh one, just to be sure mine isn't corrupt. Now ... mind you ... I had already purged the old package from my system. Yet when I tried to reinstall apt-utils_2.6.1devuan1_amd64, I get this message:
dpkg: version 2.6.1devuan1 of apt already installed, skipping
So, it is uninstalled, yet it is also already installed? There must be some traces left in the system that makes dpkg say it is already installed. Maybe this is a clue; maybe even a useful clue.
Bill
P.S. I will be out this afternoon, so I may not reply until later this evening.
Hi Bill,
On Sun July 14 2024 13:15:02 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
I used dpkg to purge all the apt-* type packages in my system, to wit:
Not recommended. TTBOMK only your apt package is broken.
sudo dpkg --purge --force-all apt-transport-https apt-utils apt-file_3.3_all apt-mirror_0.5.4-2_all apt-transport-https_2.6.1devuan1_all apt-utils_2.6.1devuan1_amd64 apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64 aptitude-common_0.8.13-5_all aptitude_0.8.13-5_amd64 devuan-apt-mirror-config-override_2.6_all dpkg-repack_1.52_all libapt-pkg-perl_0.1.40+b2_amd64 synaptic_0.91.3_amd64 apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64
Many of those are partial file names, not package names, so I don't know how much it actually did.
Then I figured that I would reinstall them one-at-a-time, using dpkg, or moving to apt, aptitude, whatever, to finish up.
I already had the package you named, but I thought, well, let's download a fresh one, just to be sure mine isn't corrupt. Now ... mind you ... I had already purged the old package from my system. Yet when I tried to reinstall apt-utils_2.6.1devuan1_amd64, I get this message:
dpkg: version 2.6.1devuan1 of apt already installed, skipping
Probably because your purge was told to purge apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64 which is not a package name.
So, it is uninstalled, yet it is also already installed? There must be some traces left in the system that makes dpkg say it is already installed. Maybe this is a clue; maybe even a useful clue.
"dpkg -l | grep apt | cut -b-78" will tell us where things stand.
--Mike
On Sunday 14 July 2024 13:59:41 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
Hi Bill,
On Sun July 14 2024 13:15:02 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
I used dpkg to purge all the apt-* type packages in my system, to wit:
Not recommended. TTBOMK only your apt package is broken.
But when I tried reinstalling a new apt package (which was the same name as my saved one), I still got that same message.
sudo dpkg --purge --force-all apt-transport-https apt-utils apt-file_3.3_all apt-mirror_0.5.4-2_all apt-transport-https_2.6.1devuan1_all apt-utils_2.6.1devuan1_amd64 apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64 aptitude-common_0.8.13-5_all aptitude_0.8.13-5_amd64 devuan-apt-mirror-config-override_2.6_all dpkg-repack_1.52_all libapt-pkg-perl_0.1.40+b2_amd64 synaptic_0.91.3_amd64 apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64
Many of those are partial file names, not package names, so I don't know how much it actually did.
Those are the exact package names (less the extension, .deb) of those in my folder of saved packages having to do with apt. When I reinstall them, nothing much changes, just the same message.
The package names themselves were copied directly from those packages.
Then I figured that I would reinstall them one-at-a-time, using dpkg, or moving to apt, aptitude, whatever, to finish up.
I already had the package you named, but I thought, well, let's download a fresh one, just to be sure mine isn't corrupt. Now ... mind you ... I had already purged the old package from my system. Yet when I tried to reinstall apt-utils_2.6.1devuan1_amd64, I get this message:
dpkg: version 2.6.1devuan1 of apt already installed, skipping
Probably because your purge was told to purge apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64 which is not a package name.
So, it is uninstalled, yet it is also already installed? There must be some traces left in the system that makes dpkg say it is already installed. Maybe this is a clue; maybe even a useful clue.
"dpkg -l | grep apt | cut -b-78" will tell us where things stand.
--Mike
sudo dpkg -l | grep apt | cut -b-78
Here is the output:
iU apt 2.6.1devuan1 ii apt-config-icons 0.16.1-2 iU apt-file 3.3 ii apt-listchanges 3.24 ii apt-mirror 0.5.4-2 iU aptitude 0.8.13-5 ii aptitude-common 0.8.13-5 ii devuan-apt-mirror-config-override 2.6 ii feedbackd 0.0.3-1 ii klaptopdaemon-trinity 4:14.1.2-0debian12.0.0 ii kmilo-trinity 4:14.1.2-0debian12.0.0 ii laptop-detect 0.16 ii libaec0:amd64 1.0.6-1+b1 ii libapt-pkg-perl 0.1.40+b2 ii libapt-pkg6.0:amd64 2.2.4+devuan1 ii libatk-adaptor:amd64 2.46.0-5 ii libcapture-tiny-perl 0.48-2 ii libfeedback-0.0-0:amd64 0.0.3-1 ii libfreeaptx0:amd64 0.1.1-2 ii liblavfile-2.1-0:amd64 1:2.1.0+debian-7 ii liblavjpeg-2.1-0:amd64 1:2.1.0+debian-7 ii liblavplay-2.1-0:amd64 1:2.1.0+debian-7 ii libmjpegutils-2.1-0:amd64 1:2.1.0+debian-7 ii libmpeg2encpp-2.1-0:amd64 1:2.1.0+debian-6 ii libmplex2-2.1-0:amd64 1:2.1.0+debian-6 ii libopencore-amrnb0:amd64 0.1.6-1 ii libopencore-amrwb0:amd64 0.1.6-1 ii libpcap0.8:amd64 1.10.3-1 ii libraptor2-0:amd64 2.0.15-4 ii libsz2:amd64 1.0.6-1+b1 ii mjpegtools 1:2.1.0+debian-7 ii mjpegtools-gtk 1:2.1.0+debian-7 ii python-apt-common 2.6.0 ii python3-apt 2.6.0 ii python3-wrapt 1.14.1-2+b2 ii r-cran-doparallel 1.0.17-1 ii r-cran-earth 5.3.2-1 ii r-cran-maptools 1:1.1-6+dfsg-1 ii r-cran-rcmdcheck 1.4.0-2 iU synaptic 0.91.3 ii task-laptop 3.73devuan1
I am dying to hear what's up.
Bill
On Mon July 15 2024 08:01:40 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
On Sunday 14 July 2024 13:59:41 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
Hi Bill,
On Sun July 14 2024 13:15:02 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
I used dpkg to purge all the apt-* type packages in my system, to wit:
Not recommended. TTBOMK only your apt package is broken.
But when I tried reinstalling a new apt package (which was the same name as my saved one), I still got that same message.
sudo dpkg --purge --force-all apt-transport-https apt-utils apt-file_3.3_all apt-mirror_0.5.4-2_all apt-transport-https_2.6.1devuan1_all apt-utils_2.6.1devuan1_amd64 apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64 aptitude-common_0.8.13-5_all aptitude_0.8.13-5_amd64 devuan-apt-mirror-config-override_2.6_all dpkg-repack_1.52_all libapt-pkg-perl_0.1.40+b2_amd64 synaptic_0.91.3_amd64 apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64
Many of those are partial file names, not package names, so I don't know how much it actually did.
Those are the exact package names (less the extension, .deb) of those in my folder of saved packages having to do with apt. When I reinstall them, nothing much changes, just the same message.
A file name is not a package name. A file name includes a package name, a version, an architecture, and more.
dpkg -i (install) uses file names.
dpkg --purge and apt use package names.
The package names themselves were copied directly from those packages.
Then I figured that I would reinstall them one-at-a-time, using dpkg, or moving to apt, aptitude, whatever, to finish up.
I already had the package you named, but I thought, well, let's download a fresh one, just to be sure mine isn't corrupt. Now ... mind you ... I had already purged the old package from my system. Yet when I tried to reinstall apt-utils_2.6.1devuan1_amd64, I get this message:
dpkg: version 2.6.1devuan1 of apt already installed, skipping
Probably because your purge was told to purge apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64 which is not a package name.
So, it is uninstalled, yet it is also already installed? There must be some traces left in the system that makes dpkg say it is already installed. Maybe this is a clue; maybe even a useful clue.
"dpkg -l | grep apt | cut -b-78" will tell us where things stand.
--Mike
sudo dpkg -l | grep apt | cut -b-78
Here is the output:
iU apt 2.6.1devuan1 ii apt-config-icons 0.16.1-2 iU apt-file 3.3 ii apt-listchanges 3.24 ii apt-mirror 0.5.4-2 iU aptitude 0.8.13-5 ii aptitude-common 0.8.13-5 ii devuan-apt-mirror-config-override 2.6 ii feedbackd 0.0.3-1 ii klaptopdaemon-trinity 4:14.1.2-0debian12.0.0 ii kmilo-trinity 4:14.1.2-0debian12.0.0 ii laptop-detect 0.16 ii libaec0:amd64 1.0.6-1+b1 ii libapt-pkg-perl 0.1.40+b2 ii libapt-pkg6.0:amd64 2.2.4+devuan1 ii libatk-adaptor:amd64 2.46.0-5 ii libcapture-tiny-perl 0.48-2 ii libfeedback-0.0-0:amd64 0.0.3-1 ii libfreeaptx0:amd64 0.1.1-2 ii liblavfile-2.1-0:amd64 1:2.1.0+debian-7 ii liblavjpeg-2.1-0:amd64 1:2.1.0+debian-7 ii liblavplay-2.1-0:amd64 1:2.1.0+debian-7 ii libmjpegutils-2.1-0:amd64 1:2.1.0+debian-7 ii libmpeg2encpp-2.1-0:amd64 1:2.1.0+debian-6 ii libmplex2-2.1-0:amd64 1:2.1.0+debian-6 ii libopencore-amrnb0:amd64 0.1.6-1 ii libopencore-amrwb0:amd64 0.1.6-1 ii libpcap0.8:amd64 1.10.3-1 ii libraptor2-0:amd64 2.0.15-4 ii libsz2:amd64 1.0.6-1+b1 ii mjpegtools 1:2.1.0+debian-7 ii mjpegtools-gtk 1:2.1.0+debian-7 ii python-apt-common 2.6.0 ii python3-apt 2.6.0 ii python3-wrapt 1.14.1-2+b2 ii r-cran-doparallel 1.0.17-1 ii r-cran-earth 5.3.2-1 ii r-cran-maptools 1:1.1-6+dfsg-1 ii r-cran-rcmdcheck 1.4.0-2 iU synaptic 0.91.3 ii task-laptop 3.73devuan1
I am dying to hear what's up.
Please show me exactly what happens when as root and in the directory containing this package file you do:
dpkg -i apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64.deb
--Mike
On Monday 15 July 2024 08:32:18 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
dpkg -i apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64.deb
I get this message: dpkg: error: cannot access archive '/home/geekstuff/archives/daedalus-bookworm_64/apt-gdebi/apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64.deb.deb': No such file or directory
And yet, what I did was to create a special folder just for that file that you recommended that I download. So it is there, but not there?
I still have all those saved packages; I just moved them to another folder, so that I can deal with them one-at-a-time.
Bill
On Monday 15 July 2024 08:32:18 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
I am dying to hear what's up.
Please show me exactly what happens when as root and in the directory containing this package file you do:
dpkg -i apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64.deb
--Mike
Whoops, sorry! My mistake. (I am just barely awake, still waiting on coffee.)
Here is the correct output:
dpkg: version 2.6.1devuan1 of apt already installed, skipping
I had accidentally inserted an extra .deb, like so: apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64.deb.deb
Bill
On Mon July 15 2024 09:00:45 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
On Monday 15 July 2024 08:32:18 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
I am dying to hear what's up.
Please show me exactly what happens when as root and in the directory containing this package file you do:
dpkg -i apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64.deb
--Mike
Whoops, sorry! My mistake. (I am just barely awake, still waiting on coffee.)
Here is the correct output:
dpkg: version 2.6.1devuan1 of apt already installed, skipping
Looks like a Devuan bug. Debian allows packages to be installed over themselves to fix file corruption problems - see the unpacking 2.6.1 over 2.6.1 note:
# dpkg -i apt_2.6.1_amd64.deb (Reading database ... 231232 files and directories currently installed.) Preparing to unpack apt_2.6.1_amd64.deb ... Unpacking apt (2.6.1) over (2.6.1) ... Setting up apt (2.6.1) ... Processing triggers for libc-bin (2.36-9+deb12u7) ... Processing triggers for man-db (2.11.2-2) ...
To work around the Devuan bug try:
dpkg --remove apt:amd64 dpkg -i apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64.deb
If that doesn't work please show me:
dpkg -C apt dpkg -V apt
--Mike
On Monday 15 July 2024 09:39:10 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
dpkg --remove apt:amd64
Okay, so maybe we're making a little progress. Here is what I get:
dpkg: dependency problems prevent removal of apt: tasksel depends on apt. reportbug depends on apt. python3-reportbug depends on apt. apt-listchanges depends on apt (>= 0.5.3). apt-file depends on apt.
dpkg: error processing package apt (--remove): dependency problems - not removing Errors were encountered while processing: apt
Again, I save all my packages, but tasksel is kept in another folder. Maybe I need to do a bit of rearranging, or making a symlink (so that tasksel is included when I install apt). But later on that.
Bill
On Mon July 15 2024 10:47:40 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
On Monday 15 July 2024 09:39:10 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
dpkg --remove apt:amd64
Okay, so maybe we're making a little progress. Here is what I get:
dpkg: dependency problems prevent removal of apt: tasksel depends on apt. reportbug depends on apt. python3-reportbug depends on apt. apt-listchanges depends on apt (>= 0.5.3). apt-file depends on apt.
dpkg: error processing package apt (--remove): dependency problems - not removing Errors were encountered while processing: apt
My mistake. I should have supplied a force flag:
dpkg --force-depends --remove apt:amd64 dpkg -i apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64.deb
--Mike
Again, I save all my packages, but tasksel is kept in another folder. Maybe I need to do a bit of rearranging, or making a symlink (so that tasksel is included when I install apt). But later on that.
This is not needed. We won't (I hope) be removing tasksel and friends.
--Mike
On Monday 15 July 2024 09:39:10 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
If that doesn't work please show me:
dpkg -C apt
> dpkg -V apt
And this:
sudo dpkg -C apt The following packages have been unpacked but not yet configured. They must be configured using dpkg --configure or the configure menu option in dselect for them to work: apt commandline package manager
sudo dpkg -V apt missing c /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/01autoremove missing c /etc/cron.daily/apt-compat missing c /etc/logrotate.d/apt
Bill
This is fine. It confirms the "iU" for apt in the "dpkg -l" output and doesn't show any new problems.
On Mon July 15 2024 10:52:11 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
On Monday 15 July 2024 09:39:10 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
If that doesn't work please show me:
dpkg -C apt
> dpkg -V apt
And this:
sudo dpkg -C apt The following packages have been unpacked but not yet configured. They must be configured using dpkg --configure or the configure menu option in dselect for them to work: apt commandline package manager
sudo dpkg -V apt missing c /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/01autoremove missing c /etc/cron.daily/apt-compat missing c /etc/logrotate.d/apt
Bill ____________________________________________________ tde-users mailing list -- users@trinitydesktop.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@trinitydesktop.org Web mail archive available at https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskt op.org
On Monday 15 July 2024 11:51:09 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
This is fine. It confirms the "iU" for apt in the "dpkg -l" output and doesn't show any new problems.
On Mon July 15 2024 10:52:11 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
On Monday 15 July 2024 09:39:10 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
If that doesn't work please show me:
dpkg -C apt
> dpkg -V apt
And this:
sudo dpkg -C apt The following packages have been unpacked but not yet configured. They must be configured using dpkg --configure or the configure menu option in dselect for them to work: apt commandline package manager
sudo dpkg -V apt missing c /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/01autoremove missing c /etc/cron.daily/apt-compat missing c /etc/logrotate.d/apt
Bill
Okay, that last dpkg command, dpkg --force-depends --remove apt:amd64, worked.
Now then, can I attempt to reinstall my apt-* packages (those package names that I listed before)?
On Mon July 15 2024 12:15:26 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
Okay, that last dpkg command, dpkg --force-depends --remove apt:amd64, worked.
Now then, can I attempt to reinstall my apt-* packages (those package names that I listed before)?
I suggest you only install apt first, using
dpkg -i apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64.deb
Most of the apt-* packages are still fully installed. Once apt itself is working you can use it to help you fix anything else that needs fixing.
Next, to show you any problems, run:
dpkg -C dpkg -V
The first really really needs to produce no output.
The second will report a bunch of changed conf files but we're looking for anything that is not a conf file. If you see any please let me know. Once any problems here are fixed we'll finish off with a rousing chorus of:
dpkg --configure -a dpkg -l | tail --lines=+6 | grep -v '^ii' | cut -b-78
--Mike
On Monday 15 July 2024 13:45:35 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
On Mon July 15 2024 12:15:26 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
Okay, that last dpkg command, dpkg --force-depends --remove apt:amd64, worked.
Now then, can I attempt to reinstall my apt-* packages (those package names that I listed before)?
I suggest you only install apt first, using
dpkg -i apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64.deb
Most of the apt-* packages are still fully installed. Once apt itself is working you can use it to help you fix anything else that needs fixing.
Next, to show you any problems, run:
dpkg -C dpkg -V
The first really really needs to produce no output.
The second will report a bunch of changed conf files but we're looking for anything that is not a conf file. If you see any please let me know. Once any problems here are fixed we'll finish off with a rousing chorus of:
dpkg --configure -a dpkg -l | tail --lines=+6 | grep -v '^ii' | cut -b-78
--Mike
I did try installing just apt first, but I still couldn't use it. That's why I tried installing its dependency. Otherwise, I haven't changed anything.
Bill
On Monday 15 July 2024 12:15:26 William Morder wrote:
Okay, that last dpkg command, dpkg --force-depends --remove apt:amd64, worked.
Now then, can I attempt to reinstall my apt-* packages (those package names that I listed before)?
Well, as I had not got a response yet, I thought I might test the waters and attempt to install apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64. It required a dependency, libc-bin_2.36-9+deb12u7_amd64, so I found and installed that, too.
I figured, hell, it's been awhile since I really messed up my system and had to rebuild, and I already have a mess now. But installing these didn't make any change. When I try to use apt, I still get that same error message:
sudo apt-get -f install apt-get: symbol lookup error: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libapt-private.so.0.0: undefined symbol: _ZN11pkgDepCache24IncreaseActionGroupLevelEv, version APTPKG_6.0
Bill
On Mon July 15 2024 13:59:35 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
Well, as I had not got a response yet, I thought I might test the waters and attempt to install apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64. It required a dependency, libc-bin_2.36-9+deb12u7_amd64, so I found and installed that, too.
I figured, hell, it's been awhile since I really messed up my system and had to rebuild, and I already have a mess now. But installing these didn't make any change. When I try to use apt, I still get that same error message:
sudo apt-get -f install apt-get: symbol lookup error: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libapt-private.so.0.0: undefined symbol: _ZN11pkgDepCache24IncreaseActionGroupLevelEv, version APTPKG_6.0
The missing symbol should be in file: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libapt-pkg.so.6.0 which comes from package libapt-pkg6.0:amd64 which our earlier "dpkg -l" told us was installed so let's have dpkg verify it:
dpkg -C dpkg -V libapt-pkg6.0:amd64
--Mike
On Monday 15 July 2024 14:51:55 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
sudo apt-get -f install apt-get: symbol lookup error: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libapt-private.so.0.0: undefined symbol: _ZN11pkgDepCache24IncreaseActionGroupLevelEv, version APTPKG_6.0
The missing symbol should be in file: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libapt-pkg.so.6.0 which comes from package libapt-pkg6.0:amd64 which our earlier "dpkg -l" told us was installed so let's have dpkg verify it:
dpkg -C dpkg -V libapt-pkg6.0:amd64
--Mike
It's kinda long, especially if I include both, but here goes:
#1 sudo dpkg -C The following packages have been unpacked but not yet configured. They must be configured using dpkg --configure or the configure menu option in dselect for them to work: apt commandline package manager apt-file search for files within Debian packages (command-line int aptitude terminal-based package manager apvlv PDF viewer with Vim-like behaviour atril MATE document viewer audacious-dev:amd64 audacious development files clamav-daemon anti-virus utility for Unix - scanner daemon clamdscan anti-virus utility for Unix - scanner client cups-bsd Common UNIX Printing System(tm) - BSD commands exim4-base support files for all Exim MTA (v4) packages firewall-config graphical configuration tool to change the firewall setti firewalld dynamically managed firewall with support for network zon fpart sort file trees and pack them into bags gir1.2-nm-1.0:amd64 GObject introspection data for the libnm library gufw graphical user interface for ufw iptables-netflow-dkms iptables target which generates netflows iptables-persistent boot-time loader for netfilter rules, iptables plugin libatrilview3 MATE document viewing library libaudclient-dev:amd64 audacious D-Bus remote control library (development files libavdevice58:amd64 FFmpeg library for handling input and output devices - ru libgtk2.0-dev:amd64 development files for the GTK library libmpv1:amd64 video player based on MPlayer/mplayer2 (client library) libqt5opengl5-dev:amd64 Qt 5 OpenGL library development files libqt6pdf6:amd64 Qt 6 PDF library mpv video player based on MPlayer/mplayer2 ntpdate Network Time Protocol client (transitional package) ntpsec-ntpdate client for setting system time from NTP servers ntpsec-ntpdig ntpdig SNTP client pdns-recursor-dbgsym debug symbols for pdns-recursor python-librdf Python language bindings for the Redland RDF library python3-matplotlib Python based plotting system in a style similar to Matlab python3-mplcursors Interactive data selection cursors for Matplotlib python3-pil.imagetk:amd64 Python Imaging Library - ImageTk Module (Python3) python3-pyxattr:amd64 module for manipulating filesystem extended attributes (P qt6-image-formats-plugin-pdf:amd64 Qt 6 PDF image format plugin qtbase5-dev:amd64 Qt 5 base development files r-cran-pdftools GNU R text extraction, rendering and converting of PDF do soundconverter GNOME application to convert audio files into other forma squashfuse FUSE filesystem to mount squashfs archives synaptic Graphical package manager uefitool UEFI firmware image viewer and editor
The following packages are only half configured, probably due to problems configuring them the first time. The configuration should be retried using dpkg --configure <package> or the configure menu option in dselect: pdns-recursor PowerDNS Recursor
#2 sudo dpkg -V libapt-pkg6.0:amd64
Okay, I just realized that I am perhaps installing something, rather than just verifying? There is no response at all, just an empty line.
Bill
On Mon July 15 2024 18:52:10 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
On Monday 15 July 2024 14:51:55 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
sudo apt-get -f install apt-get: symbol lookup error: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libapt-private.so.0.0: undefined symbol: _ZN11pkgDepCache24IncreaseActionGroupLevelEv, version APTPKG_6.0
The missing symbol should be in file: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libapt-pkg.so.6.0 which comes from package libapt-pkg6.0:amd64 which our earlier "dpkg -l" told us was installed so let's have dpkg verify it:
dpkg -C dpkg -V libapt-pkg6.0:amd64
--Mike
It's kinda long, especially if I include both, but here goes:
#1 sudo dpkg -C The following packages have been unpacked but not yet configured. They must be configured using dpkg --configure or the configure menu option in dselect for them to work: apt commandline package manager apt-file search for files within Debian packages (command-line int aptitude terminal-based package manager apvlv PDF viewer with Vim-like behaviour atril MATE document viewer audacious-dev:amd64 audacious development files clamav-daemon anti-virus utility for Unix - scanner daemon clamdscan anti-virus utility for Unix - scanner client cups-bsd Common UNIX Printing System(tm) - BSD commands exim4-base support files for all Exim MTA (v4) packages firewall-config graphical configuration tool to change the firewall setti firewalld dynamically managed firewall with support for network zon fpart sort file trees and pack them into bags gir1.2-nm-1.0:amd64 GObject introspection data for the libnm library gufw graphical user interface for ufw iptables-netflow-dkms iptables target which generates netflows iptables-persistent boot-time loader for netfilter rules, iptables plugin libatrilview3 MATE document viewing library libaudclient-dev:amd64 audacious D-Bus remote control library (development files libavdevice58:amd64 FFmpeg library for handling input and output devices
- ru
libgtk2.0-dev:amd64 development files for the GTK library libmpv1:amd64 video player based on MPlayer/mplayer2 (client library) libqt5opengl5-dev:amd64 Qt 5 OpenGL library development files libqt6pdf6:amd64 Qt 6 PDF library mpv video player based on MPlayer/mplayer2 ntpdate Network Time Protocol client (transitional package) ntpsec-ntpdate client for setting system time from NTP servers ntpsec-ntpdig ntpdig SNTP client pdns-recursor-dbgsym debug symbols for pdns-recursor python-librdf Python language bindings for the Redland RDF library python3-matplotlib Python based plotting system in a style similar to Matlab python3-mplcursors Interactive data selection cursors for Matplotlib python3-pil.imagetk:amd64 Python Imaging Library - ImageTk Module (Python3) python3-pyxattr:amd64 module for manipulating filesystem extended attributes (P qt6-image-formats-plugin-pdf:amd64 Qt 6 PDF image format plugin qtbase5-dev:amd64 Qt 5 base development files r-cran-pdftools GNU R text extraction, rendering and converting of PDF do soundconverter GNOME application to convert audio files into other forma squashfuse FUSE filesystem to mount squashfs archives synaptic Graphical package manager uefitool UEFI firmware image viewer and editor
The following packages are only half configured, probably due to problems configuring them the first time. The configuration should be retried using dpkg --configure <package> or the configure menu option in dselect: pdns-recursor PowerDNS Recursor
It looks like your system bombed during a lengthy install or upgrade, at the point where it was configuring pdns-recursor. This may have been a long time ago or recently.
It seems strange to me that you just installed apt but the first item in "dpkg -C" tells you that apt is only half-installed.
#2 sudo dpkg -V libapt-pkg6.0:amd64
Okay, I just realized that I am perhaps installing something, rather than just verifying? There is no response at all, just an empty line.
The empty result from "dpkg -V libapt-pkg6.0:amd64" is good - it means there were no problems with that package.
Please try "ldconfig" and then "dpkg --configure -a". If these don't fix things you're probably going to have to re-install because we can't work with a dpkg that says it successfully installed apt when it didn't.
--Mike
On Monday 15 July 2024 20:07:43 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
The empty result from "dpkg -V libapt-pkg6.0:amd64" is good - it means there were no problems with that package.
Please try "ldconfig" and then "dpkg --configure -a". If these don't fix things you're probably going to have to re-install because we can't work with a dpkg that says it successfully installed apt when it didn't.
--Mike
Probably I jumped the gun to get some packages working with dpkg; because, you see, I am busy with stuff in the outside world, yet some of this depends on having a working machine, and I have very little spare time at present to go through yet another reinstallation. However, maybe tomorrow ...
sudo ldconfig returns nothing at all.
sudo dpkg --configure -a dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of iptables-persistent: iptables-persistent depends on netfilter-persistent (= 1.0.20); however: Package netfilter-persistent is not installed. ufw (0.36.2-1) breaks iptables-persistent and is installed.
dpkg: error processing package iptables-persistent (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: iptables-persistent
sudo dpkg --configure --force-depends -a dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of iptables-persistent: iptables-persistent depends on netfilter-persistent (= 1.0.20); however: Package netfilter-persistent is not installed. ufw (0.36.2-1) breaks iptables-persistent and is installed.
dpkg: error processing package iptables-persistent (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: iptables-persistent
I actually use ufw. I have considered making more use of iptables, but ufw is my go-to firewall at the moment.
Bill
On Mon July 15 2024 20:18:03 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
On Monday 15 July 2024 20:07:43 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
The empty result from "dpkg -V libapt-pkg6.0:amd64" is good - it means there were no problems with that package.
Please try "ldconfig" and then "dpkg --configure -a". If these don't fix things you're probably going to have to re-install because we can't work with a dpkg that says it successfully installed apt when it didn't.
--Mike
Probably I jumped the gun to get some packages working with dpkg; because, you see, I am busy with stuff in the outside world, yet some of this depends on having a working machine, and I have very little spare time at present to go through yet another reinstallation. However, maybe tomorrow ...
sudo ldconfig returns nothing at all.
That's good.
sudo dpkg --configure -a dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of iptables-persistent: iptables-persistent depends on netfilter-persistent (= 1.0.20); however: Package netfilter-persistent is not installed. ufw (0.36.2-1) breaks iptables-persistent and is installed.
dpkg: error processing package iptables-persistent (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: iptables-persistent
sudo dpkg --configure --force-depends -a dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of iptables-persistent: iptables-persistent depends on netfilter-persistent (= 1.0.20); however: Package netfilter-persistent is not installed. ufw (0.36.2-1) breaks iptables-persistent and is installed.
dpkg: error processing package iptables-persistent (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: iptables-persistent
No problems reported from anything apt related. Just some simple firewall conflicts.
I actually use ufw. I have considered making more use of iptables, but ufw is my go-to firewall at the moment.
So, does apt work now?
--Mike
On Monday 15 July 2024 21:04:41 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
sudo ldconfig returns nothing at all.
That's good.
sudo dpkg --configure -a dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of iptables-persistent: iptables-persistent depends on netfilter-persistent (= 1.0.20); however: Package netfilter-persistent is not installed. ufw (0.36.2-1) breaks iptables-persistent and is installed.
dpkg: error processing package iptables-persistent (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: iptables-persistent
sudo dpkg --configure --force-depends -a dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of iptables-persistent: iptables-persistent depends on netfilter-persistent (= 1.0.20); however: Package netfilter-persistent is not installed. ufw (0.36.2-1) breaks iptables-persistent and is installed.
dpkg: error processing package iptables-persistent (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: iptables-persistent
No problems reported from anything apt related. Just some simple firewall conflicts.
I actually use ufw. I have considered making more use of iptables, but ufw is my go-to firewall at the moment.
So, does apt work now?
--Mike
Same error message as before, like a broken record:
apt-get: symbol lookup error: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libapt-private.so.0.0: undefined symbol: _ZN11pkgDepCache24IncreaseActionGroupLevelEv, version APTPKG_6.0
Looks like I will probably have to do another reinstallation; but hopefully this time I won't be pressed for time. I think that probably screwed me up.
Bill
On Mon July 15 2024 21:45:05 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
_ZN11pkgDepCache24IncreaseActionGroupLevelEv
A few days ago someone - maybe you - reported finding the same problem, but in Ubuntu:
https://askubuntu.com/questions/1469908/error-apt-symbol-lookup-error-lib-x8...
I think at this point you're better off reinstalling. I might be able to fix it hands on via ssh with a few hours work but by email with a round trip time of a couple of hours it could take weeks to fix it so reinstalling is going to be a lot faster unless someone else has a better idea.
Good luck,
--Mike
On Monday 15 July 2024 22:08:54 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
On Mon July 15 2024 21:45:05 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
_ZN11pkgDepCache24IncreaseActionGroupLevelEv
A few days ago someone - maybe you - reported finding the same problem, but in Ubuntu:
https://askubuntu.com/questions/1469908/error-apt-symbol-lookup-error-lib-x 86-64-linux-gnu-libapt-private-so-0-0-und
Not myself, but I believe one of the others who responded, Steven D'Aprano, think? Give props to the right person.
I think at this point you're better off reinstalling. I might be able to fix it hands on via ssh with a few hours work but by email with a round trip time of a couple of hours it could take weeks to fix it so reinstalling is going to be a lot faster unless someone else has a better idea.
Good luck,
--Mike
Yeah, I am resigned to that, but it will have to wait at least until tomorrow or later this week, Thursday or thereafter. At least my machine is still sort of working right now.
Bill
Anno domini 2024 Sun, 14 Jul 10:41:28 -0700 William Morder via tde-users scripsit:
On Saturday 13 July 2024 10:01:04 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
"dpkg -s apt | head" will tell you the apt version and architecture you need to download.
Once downloaded you can install it using dpkg.
This works for most broken packages unless you break something essential like dpkg or libc.
For example, if I needed to fix my Debian apt I would browse to "http://ftp.debian.org/debian/" and then click down through pool, main, a, apt, and then download apt_2.6.1_amd64.deb but you may be using a different distro, version, or architecture.
--Mike
I found that page for Debian, and it is *almost* exactly what I need; almost, that is, except I run Devuan.
There is a page for Debian package search (https://packages.debian.org/index), and I used to use it all the time, back when I was a Debian user.
Now I keep trying to find the corresponding page in Devuan, but the URL address doesn't follow quite the same pattern. I have found it, saved it, maybe a couple dozen times, and somehow it keeps vanishing on me.
If anybody knows the page for Devuan package search, that would be a great help. Neither apt nor aptitude nor any other work for me at present, until I solve this other problem (for which, see previous posts under this thread).
https://www.devuan.org/os/packages gives a link to a search page:
https://pkginfo.devuan.org/cgi-bin/policy-query.html
Also, aptitude itself, while impressive, and useful to others, is not much use to me, as it keeps trying to uninstall my Open Office (as well as, if I recall, some other programs that I use pretty regularly). It would be nice if aptitude gave users more control, as in apt or apt-get. I still use it for searching and finding more information, but not for actual installation.
Try "apt-mark hold <whateverisopenofficecalled>" and then "aptitude whateverypuwanttodo"
I don't know if this will solve my problem, though, as I already save all my downloaded and installed packages (for situations just like this), and everything seems up-to-date.
you should clear the cache first, either manually or with "apt-get clean".
To find all files that do not match the checksums in theit .deb package you may want to run:
$ for i in $(dpkg -l|awk '/^ii/ {print $2}'); do echo $i:; dpkg -V $i; done acl: acpi: acpi-support: ??5?????? c /etc/acpi/lid.sh acpi-support-base: acpid:
... bad former myself has modified /etc/acpi/lid.sh :)
Nik
Bill
tde-users mailing list -- users@trinitydesktop.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@trinitydesktop.org Web mail archive available at https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskto...
-- Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA, CIA ...
Anno domini 2024 Sun, 14 Jul 19:58:26 +0200 Dr. Nikolaus Klepp via tde-users scripsit:
Anno domini 2024 Sun, 14 Jul 10:41:28 -0700 William Morder via tde-users scripsit:
On Saturday 13 July 2024 10:01:04 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
"dpkg -s apt | head" will tell you the apt version and architecture you need to download.
Once downloaded you can install it using dpkg.
This works for most broken packages unless you break something essential like dpkg or libc.
For example, if I needed to fix my Debian apt I would browse to "http://ftp.debian.org/debian/" and then click down through pool, main, a, apt, and then download apt_2.6.1_amd64.deb but you may be using a different distro, version, or architecture.
--Mike
I found that page for Debian, and it is *almost* exactly what I need; almost, that is, except I run Devuan.
There is a page for Debian package search (https://packages.debian.org/index), and I used to use it all the time, back when I was a Debian user.
Now I keep trying to find the corresponding page in Devuan, but the URL address doesn't follow quite the same pattern. I have found it, saved it, maybe a couple dozen times, and somehow it keeps vanishing on me.
If anybody knows the page for Devuan package search, that would be a great help. Neither apt nor aptitude nor any other work for me at present, until I solve this other problem (for which, see previous posts under this thread).
https://www.devuan.org/os/packages gives a link to a search page:
https://pkginfo.devuan.org/cgi-bin/policy-query.html
Also, aptitude itself, while impressive, and useful to others, is not much use to me, as it keeps trying to uninstall my Open Office (as well as, if I recall, some other programs that I use pretty regularly). It would be nice if aptitude gave users more control, as in apt or apt-get. I still use it for searching and finding more information, but not for actual installation.
Try "apt-mark hold <whateverisopenofficecalled>" and then "aptitude whateverypuwanttodo"
I don't know if this will solve my problem, though, as I already save all my downloaded and installed packages (for situations just like this), and everything seems up-to-date.
you should clear the cache first, either manually or with "apt-get clean".
To find all files that do not match the checksums in theit .deb package you may want to run:
$ for i in $(dpkg -l|awk '/^ii/ {print $2}'); do echo $i:; dpkg -V $i; done acl: acpi: acpi-support: ??5?????? c /etc/acpi/lid.sh acpi-support-base: acpid:
... bad former myself has modified /etc/acpi/lid.sh :)
... or better this, less chatter:
$ for i in $(dpkg -l|awk '/^ii/ {print $2}'); do dpkg -V $i | while read a; do echo $i: $a; done; done acpi-support: ??5?????? c /etc/acpi/lid.sh avahi-daemon: missing /etc/avahi/services ca-certificates-java: Downloads Notebooks c /etc/default/cacerts cups-daemon: missing /var/cache/cups/rss (Keine Berechtigung) cups-daemon: missing /var/spool/cups/tmp (Keine Berechtigung) cups-filters: Downloads Notebooks /usr/lib/cups/backend/cups-brf debian-archive-keyring: ??5?????? c /etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d/debian-archive-buster-stable.asc dma: Downloads Notebooks c /etc/dma/auth.conf
Nik
Nik
Bill
tde-users mailing list -- users@trinitydesktop.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@trinitydesktop.org Web mail archive available at https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskto...
-- Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA, CIA ... ____________________________________________________ tde-users mailing list -- users@trinitydesktop.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@trinitydesktop.org Web mail archive available at https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskto...
-- Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA, CIA ...
On Sunday 14 July 2024 11:02:24 Dr. Nikolaus Klepp via tde-users wrote:
for i in $(dpkg -l|awk '/^ii/ {print $2}'); do dpkg -V $i | while read a; do echo $i: $a; done; done acpi-support: ??5?????? c /etc/acpi/lid.sh
Okay, I think maybe Nik is on to something here.
When I woke up and realized that the power was out, but my laptop was still running, I tried to get it to hibernate so that I could save my session and return to my work.
I only use hibernate, out of the other powersaving features. Otherwise, I tend to use performance mode, and disable everything else. I shut the lid on the laptop to hibernate; and otherwise, I shut down completely.
So perhaps, just maybe, I have messed up something in the acpi?
Bill
Anno domini 2024 Mon, 15 Jul 13:50:28 -0700 William Morder via tde-users scripsit:
On Sunday 14 July 2024 11:02:24 Dr. Nikolaus Klepp via tde-users wrote:
for i in $(dpkg -l|awk '/^ii/ {print $2}'); do dpkg -V $i | while read a; do echo $i: $a; done; done acpi-support: ??5?????? c /etc/acpi/lid.sh
Okay, I think maybe Nik is on to something here.
When I woke up and realized that the power was out, but my laptop was still running, I tried to get it to hibernate so that I could save my session and return to my work.
I only use hibernate, out of the other powersaving features. Otherwise, I tend to use performance mode, and disable everything else. I shut the lid on the laptop to hibernate; and otherwise, I shut down completely.
So perhaps, just maybe, I have messed up something in the acpi?
My /etc/rc.local has these lines since 6.5.x, 'cause the nice laptop supended when I closed the lid and then did not execute my lid.sh - well, it tried, but some genius made sure that the powermanagement suspended before the machine turned off:
# PM Suspend deaktivieren chmod a-rwx /sys/power/state
... I'm sure the ginus responsible for me having to to this will find a workaround and stab me in my back sooner or later ...
Oh, I do not use suspend nor hibernate, have no swap partition or swap file (but lots of ram). I don't use sessions any more, but niche shell programs that ser up my environment for certain jobs. My laptop turns off when remaining runtime is less than 5 minutes.
Nik
Bill ____________________________________________________ tde-users mailing list -- users@trinitydesktop.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@trinitydesktop.org Web mail archive available at https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskto...
-- Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA, CIA ...
-
dep -
Dr. Nikolaus Klepp -
E. Liddell -
Felix Miata -
Mike Bird -
phiebie＠drei.at -
Steven D'Aprano -
William Morder