Marcelo Chiapparini skrev:
Recently I upgraded OO and something happens with the gstreamer library. Now, aptitude tries to uninstall a bunch of packages.


Hi,

Here are my attempts at comments. The ordering is arbitrary.

1) All packages that are marked {u} have been auto-installed to satisfy a dependency of some other package. Now that package was uninstalled, and the dependencies are treated as no longer needed, and will be uninstalled as well.

From the output, I guess that you run a gnome desktop, and that the meta-package you uninstalled was gnome or gnome-desktop-environment. In that case, the best fix would be to reinstall that meta-package. That might also auto-reinstall the other packages you are missing, like cheese and rhythmbox.

The other fix would be to mark the packages as "manually installed", and then aptitude should not remove them automatically.

See a thread called :"Why aptitude wants to remove zenity and xserver-xephyr?" from 20/11 2009 on this list for more info on that.

I would attempt to first resolve the next issue with the broken package using apt-get (apt-get does not autoremove packages as far as I know) instead of aptitude, and then use aptitude to resolve this issue.


2) You have a broken package:

The following packages are BROKEN:
libgstreamer0.10-0

This may have to be fixed before other things can work as you expect them to. Aptitude says:

> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>   libgstreamer0.10-0: Conflicts: gstreamer0.10-plugins-base (<
> 0.10.25.2) but 0.10.19-2 is to be installed.
> The following actions will resolve these dependencies:
>
> Install the following packages:
> gstreamer0.10-plugins-base [0.10.26-1~bpo50+1 (lenny-backports)]

And you wrote:

> # dpkg -l |grep libgstreamer0.10-0
> ii  libgstreamer0.10-0                   0.10.26-1~bpo50+1
>    Core GStreamer libraries and elements


So it seems that upgrading gstreamer0.10-plugins-base to the backports version would be a good idea.



3) You also have an unsatisfied recommendation:

Leave the following dependencies unresolved:
gvfs recommends gvfs-backends

As I understand it, following recommendations from the package system should be useful for most users. Unless you have a reason not to have gvfs-backends installed, I recommend you install it.





Hope it helped

/ johan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/hn1838$33...@dough.gmane.org

Reply via email to