13 Jul
2024
13 Jul
'24
7:44 a.m.
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
13 Jul
13 Jul
9:18 a.m.
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(a)trinitydesktop.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)trinitydesktop.org
Web mail archive available at
https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskt…
--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA,
CIA ...
9:37 a.m.
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
10:17 a.m.
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:
Well, sometimes I even remember :)
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.
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(a)trinitydesktop.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)trinitydesktop.org
Web mail archive available at
https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskt…
--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA,
CIA ...
10:38 a.m.
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:
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
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
8:41 p.m.
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/
14 Jul
14 Jul
4:45 p.m.
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
5:15 p.m.
New subject: UPS (was: problems with apt & aptitude)
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-wo…
--
Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion,
based on faith, not based on science.
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!
Felix Miata
7:24 p.m.
New subject: UPS (was: problems with apt & aptitude)
On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 13:15:33 -0400
Felix Miata via tde-users <users(a)trinitydesktop.org> wrote:
William Morder composed on 2024-07-14 09:45
(UTC-0700):
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
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-wo…
6:02 p.m.
[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(a)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(a)trinitydesktop.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)trinitydesktop.org
Web mail archive available at
https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskt…
13 Jul
13 Jul
12:06 p.m.
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.
1:17 p.m.
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-x…
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.
--
Steven
2:04 p.m.
On Saturday 13 July 2024 06:17:43 Steven D'Aprano via tde-users wrote:
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.
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?
Where are you getting the installer from? Is the media
faulty?
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
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. 
5:01 p.m.
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
14 Jul
14 Jul
5:21 p.m.
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(a)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
5:49 p.m.
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:
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_am…
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_am…
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
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(a)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.
5:41 p.m.
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
5:51 p.m.
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
8:15 p.m.
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:
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.
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
8:59 p.m.
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
15 Jul
15 Jul
3:01 p.m.
On Sunday 14 July 2024 13:59:41 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
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.
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
Hi Bill,
On Sun July 14 2024 13:15:02 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
But when I tried reinstalling a new apt package (which was the same name as my
saved one), I still got that same message.
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
3:32 p.m.
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:
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.
Hi Bill,
On Sun July 14 2024 13:15:02 William Morder via tde-users wrote:
But when I tried reinstalling a new apt package (which was the same name as
my saved one), I still got that same message.
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. The package names themselves were copied directly from
those packages.
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
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
3:56 p.m.
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
4 p.m.
On Monday 15 July 2024 08:32:18 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
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
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
4:39 p.m.
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:
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
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
5:47 p.m.
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
6:47 p.m.
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:
My mistake. I should have supplied a force flag:
dpkg --force-depends --remove apt:amd64
dpkg -i apt_2.6.1devuan1_amd64.deb
--Mike
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.
This is not needed. We won't (I hope) be removing tasksel and friends.
--Mike
5:52 p.m.
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
6:51 p.m.
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(a)trinitydesktop.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)trinitydesktop.org
Web mail archive available at
https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskt
op.org
7:15 p.m.
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)?
8:45 p.m.
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
9:02 p.m.
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:
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
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
8:59 p.m.
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
9:51 p.m.
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
16 Jul
16 Jul
1:52 a.m.
On Monday 15 July 2024 14:51:55 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
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
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
3:07 a.m.
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:
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.
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 #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
3:18 a.m.
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
4:04 a.m.
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:
That's good.
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
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
4:45 a.m.
On Monday 15 July 2024 21:04:41 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
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
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
5:08 a.m.
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…
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
5:23 a.m.
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:
Not myself, but I believe one of the others who responded, Steven D'Aprano,
think? Give props to the right person.
_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
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
14 Jul
14 Jul
5:58 p.m.
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:
https://www.devuan.org/os/packages gives a link to a search page:
https://pkginfo.devuan.org/cgi-bin/policy-query.html
"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.
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(a)trinitydesktop.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)trinitydesktop.org
Web mail archive available at
https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskt…
--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA,
CIA ...
6:02 p.m.
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:
... 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
On Saturday 13 July 2024 10:01:04 Mike Bird via tde-users wrote:
https://www.devuan.org/os/packages gives a link to a search page:
https://pkginfo.devuan.org/cgi-bin/policy-query.html
"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.
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
--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA,
CIA ...
Bill
____________________________________________________
tde-users mailing list -- users(a)trinitydesktop.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)trinitydesktop.org
Web mail archive available at
https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskt…
--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA,
CIA ...
____________________________________________________
tde-users mailing list -- users(a)trinitydesktop.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)trinitydesktop.org
Web mail archive available at
https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskt…
15 Jul
15 Jul
8:50 p.m.
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
9:01 p.m.
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:
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
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
____________________________________________________
tde-users mailing list -- users(a)trinitydesktop.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)trinitydesktop.org
Web mail archive available at
https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@trinitydeskt…
--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA,
CIA ...
158
days inactive
161
days old
44 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
dep -
Dr. Nikolaus Klepp -
E. Liddell -
Felix Miata -
Mike Bird -
phiebie＠drei.at -
Steven D'Aprano -
William Morder