On 07/24/2007 04:50 AM, Mark Grieveson wrote: >On 07/24/2007 12:20 AM, Glen Pfeiffer wrote: > > When I try to install with "aptitude -t etch-backports > > install openoffice.org", aptitude proposes an interesting > > solution. From what I see, I don't think I should accept it. > > It looks fine to me; so, I would just accept it. It just seems > to be upgrading openoffice.org, as opposed to wanting to do > something drastic, like remove your xserver, or something. I > upgraded openoffice.org using backports, and it works fine. >
What concerns me are the two following sections. Note, I still have a lot to learn about Debian, therefore some of my concern is me being cautious so as not to break anything. > > The following packages are BROKEN: > > openoffice.org-base openoffice.org-calc openoffice.org-common > > openoffice.org-core openoffice.org-draw openoffice.org-evolution > > openoffice.org-gnome openoffice.org-gtk openoffice.org-impress > > openoffice.org-java-common openoffice.org-math > > openoffice.org-writer > > python-uno Now I suppose that is understandable because those are all affected by openoffice.org. But I was not expecting to see them reported as BROKEN. AND: > > The following packages have been kept back: > > kdelibs-data kdelibs4c2a kdemultimedia-kio-plugins ktuberling > > libarts1-akode libfinance-quote-perl libkcddb1 libkdegames1 > > libmysqlclient15off libpisock9 libpisync0 linux-image-2.6-486 > > mysql-client-5.0 mysql-common mysql-server-5.0 > > openoffice.org-help-en-us ttf-opensymbol tuxpaint tuxpaint-config > > tuxpaint-data vim-common vim-full vim-gui-common vim-runtime vim-tiny Why does Aptitude think these packages could be updated? As I stated in my original message, it is completely up-to-date before I try installing OOo 2.2.1. I guess I will give it a shot over the weekend when I have time to fix any breakage. -- Glen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
