Daniel Burrows wrote: > On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 09:20:23PM -0700, Josh Triplett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > was heard to say: >> I updated the package lists, and then started marking packages to upgrade >> with >> '+'. I marked several openoffice.org-related packages to upgrade, which made >> aptitude highlight the rest as broken because their dependencies require a >> simultaneous uprade to the new version of all openoffice.org-related >> packages. >> I hit 'e' to examine the recommended resolution, and it said: >> --\ Upgrade the following packages: >> >> openoffice.org-filter-binfilter [2.2.1-4 now -> 2.2.1-5 unstable, >> unstable] >> openoffice.org-gcj [2.2.1-4 now -> 2.2.1-5 unstable, >> unstable] >> openoffice.org-gnome [2.2.1-4 now -> 2.2.1-5 unstable, >> unstable] >> openoffice.org-gtk [2.2.1-4 now -> 2.2.1-5 unstable, >> unstable] >> python-uno [2.2.1-4 now -> 2.2.1-5 unstable, >> unstable] >> I then hit '!' to apply these changes. Aptitude marked python-uno and >> openoffice.org-filter-binfilter for upgrade, but marked the other three >> packages for removal. > > Were they listed as being unused packages?
No. - Josh Triplett
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
