On Mon, 2002-02-25 at 21:07, Blars Blarson wrote: > On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 06:11:52PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > > I don't think this is related to libstdc++2.10-dev (a dev package not > > containing any shared libs). > > As I said, the apt maintainer wasn't willing to accept the bug as > their fault. Since libstdc++2.10-dev fails install and seems to cause > catastophic failures with the dist-upgrade, you're second choice.
There is no point just trying to pin the blame on arbitrary packages. The fact that libstdc++2.10-dev won't configure is a symptom of the problem, not the cause. > > > First significant bug is: > > > > > > Preparing to replace libstdc++2.10-dev 1:2.95.2-13 (using > > > .../libstdc++2.10-dev_1%3a2.95.4-1_i386.deb) ... > > > perl: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.2' not found (required by > > > /lib/libdb.so.3) It's fairly clear that this failure is caused by incompatible versions of libdb2 and libc6 having been installed. And, sure enough, a few lines higher up in your log you will see: Unpacking replacement libdb2-dev ... Replacing files in old package libc6-dev ... Preparing to replace libdb2-util 2:2.4.14-2.7.7.1.c (using .../libdb2-util_2%3a2.7.7.0-3.1_i386.deb) ... Unpacking replacement libdb2-util ... Preparing to replace libdb2 2:2.4.14-2.7.7.1.c (using .../libdb2_2%3a2.7.7.0-3.1_i386.deb) ... Unpacking replacement libdb2 ... Replacing files in old package libc6 ... I suggest you try reassigning the bug to libdb2. p.
