Package: openoffice.org-core Severity: serious Version: 1:3.0.1-3 Hi,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > what I get is > > |~# apt-get dist-upgrade > |Reading package lists... Done > |Building dependency tree > |Reading state information... Done > |Calculating upgrade... Done > |The following packages have been kept back: > | openoffice.org-core shared-mime-info > |0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 2 not upgraded. > |~# apt-get install openoffice.org-core > |Reading package lists... Done > |Building dependency tree > |Reading state information... Done > |Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have > |requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable > |distribution that some required packages have not yet been created > |or been moved out of Incoming. > |The following information may help to resolve the situation: > | > |The following packages have unmet dependencies: > | openoffice.org-core: Depends: libicu40 (>= 4.0-1) but it is not installable > |E: Broken packages > |~# apt-get install libicu40 > |Reading package lists... Done > |Building dependency tree > |Reading state information... Done > |Package libicu40 is not available, but is referred to by another package. > |This may mean that the package is missing, has been obsoleted, or > |is only available from another source > |E: Package libicu40 has no installation candidate And why is this posted to #516084? Which talks about a mixture between 2.4.1 and 3.0.1 possible which fails install? Not about 3.0.1-3 built against an experimental package. Please post unrelated messages for other bufs to unrelated and closed bugs without reason, thanks. But yes, it seems I accidentially built against libicu40. Kurt, can we bin-NMU openoffice.org in sid against libicu38? > So we could either to rebuild against the icu version sid (if possible) That should be preferred... > or migrate icu40 from exp into sid. According to the buildd log [1], libicu > is not the only package which is not (yet) migrated. It is. There's no buildlog for amd64 because I build it, and if I built it in a clean sid it would have worked... (i.e. it would have gotten a dep on libicu38...) > Is this something worth to reopen or this or should I open wishlist bug No way for reopen. The bugs are different. If at all a new bug against OOo. > against icu (and other libs missing)? Nope, it's a OOo bug. [ Nevertheless, icu 4.0 should be uploaded to sid when the release team agrees with it ] Grüße/Regards, René -- .''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/ `. `' r...@debian.org | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73 `- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
