On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:17 AM, The Wanderer <wande...@fastmail.fm> wrote: > > On 12/11/2012 08:56 AM, Fabian Greffrath wrote: > >> Am 11.12.2012 14:44, schrieb The Wanderer: >> >>> And since I didn't say it explicitly before: although I do think the bug >>> report is legitimate, I'm willing enough at this point to fix my own >>> package-install situation manually and proceed from there, if no one has >>> any further suggestions for how to proceed. >> >> >> You could try "aptitude why libjack-jackd2-0" to find out what caused the >> installation of that package and thus the removal of libjack0. > > > Unfortunately, that just reports > p libjack-jackd2-dev Provides libjack-dev > p libjack-jackd2-dev Depends libjack-jackd2-0 (= > 1.9.8~dfsg.4+20120529git007c > dc37-4.1) > which doesn't tell me anything I didn't already know. > > I played around with why and why-not for a few other packages as well, but > didn't succeed in tracking anything down. (I wasn't aware of these commands, > and > I think they may be useful for future reference.) > > It seems possible that this might change if I actually go through with the > "remove libjack0 and libjack-dev" dist-upgrade, so that the jackd2 packages > are > actually installed (and the jackd1 packages are not) - but so far I haven't > done > that, and I'm not sure I'd like to. >
I tried to reproduce this on a clean chroot: 1. Create squeeze chroot 2. Install libjack-dev, jackd and jack1 3. install ia32-libs 4. Add wheezy to sources.list 5. Upgrade apt and dpkg (needed for multiarch) 6. Add i386 foreign architecture in dpkg and apt-get update again 7. apt-get dist-upgrade This caused a lot of installs (including a :i386 flurry), but libjack-dev was not removed, and libjack-jack2-0 was not installed. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
