Re: detecting uninstallable packages in sid/experimental (was: Re: Bug#793405: nmu: caja-actions_1.8.0+dfsg1-1)

2015-07-24 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Freitag, 24. Juli 2015, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > Since a recent update to piuparts it is possible to detect some > uninstallable packages in sid and experimental in a more timely fashion > (which resulted in /me filing more binNMU bugs): > > piuparts.debian.org has

detecting uninstallable packages in sid/experimental (was: Re: Bug#793405: nmu: caja-actions_1.8.0+dfsg1-1)

2015-07-23 Thread Andreas Beckmann
gt; >> ==> caja-actions/amd64 unsatisfiable Depends: libgtop2-7 (>= 2.22.3) > > Scheduled. (As usual, thanks for noticing such things - it's a great help.) Since a recent update to piuparts it is possible to detect some uninstallable packages in sid and experimental in a

Re: computing long-time uninstallable packages

2007-07-30 Thread Filippo Giunchedi
On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 08:48:21AM +0200, Ralf Treinen wrote: > I have added this now to edos.debian.net The oldest date ocurring in the > listings is July 17 since this is from when I started to collect > historical data. There are still some things to improve, I will do that > when I am back from

Re: computing long-time uninstallable packages

2007-07-29 Thread Ralf Treinen
Hello, On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 05:23:10PM +0200, Filippo Giunchedi wrote: > is there a list of packages uninstallable (in sid for example) since a long > time > (e.g >= 15-20 days)? > > I first thought at edos.debian.net but it shows only differences with the run > before, which is nice but the

Re: computing long-time uninstallable packages

2007-07-23 Thread Ralf Treinen
Hello, On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 05:23:10PM +0200, Filippo Giunchedi wrote: > is there a list of packages uninstallable (in sid for example) since a long > time > (e.g >= 15-20 days)? http://brion.inria.fr You can access the so-called liftable of a package like this http://brion.inria.fr/anla/l

computing long-time uninstallable packages

2007-07-21 Thread Filippo Giunchedi
Hi, is there a list of packages uninstallable (in sid for example) since a long time (e.g >= 15-20 days)? I first thought at edos.debian.net but it shows only differences with the run before, which is nice but there are normal temporary breakages as the buildds catch up. Also on http://qa.debian.o

Re: Uninstallable Packages

1999-10-16 Thread Juergen A. Erhard
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > "Anthony" == Anthony Towns writes: Anthony> --3MwIy2ne0vdjdPXF Anthony> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Anthony> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Anthony> Hello world, Anthony> I'm experimenting with

Re: Uninstallable Packages

1999-10-08 Thread Taketoshi Sano
Hi. In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Anthony Towns writes: > I'm experimenting with a script to work out whether packages are > installable or not. I figured the world at large might be interested in > some of the results. Thank you for your nice work. > The following packages are not installab

Re: Uninstallable Packages

1999-10-08 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
> > I'm experimenting with a script to work out whether packages are > > installable or not. I figured the world at large might be interested in > > some of the results. Aj.. You do know that APT has included such a function for quite some time now, apt-cache unmet -i will print out all package

Re: Uninstallable Packages

1999-10-07 Thread Roland Rosenfeld
On Thu, 07 Oct 1999, Kurt D. Starsinic wrote: > secure-su is also uninstallable. As far as I can see, secure-su is no longer available in potato. It is replaced by the login package (including /bin/su) which is now linked with PAM and this behaves like the secure-su if you activate the line

Re: Uninstallable Packages

1999-10-07 Thread Kurt D. Starsinic
On Thu, Oct 07, 1999 at 07:27:38PM +0200, Thomas Schoepf wrote: > On Thu, Oct 07, 1999 at 11:29:34AM -0400, Kurt D. Starsinic wrote: > > secure-su is also uninstallable. > > > > Depends: login >=970502-1 > > Current: login 19990827-5 > > > > Does anybody else think it's kind o

Re: Uninstallable Packages

1999-10-07 Thread Thomas Schoepf
On Thu, Oct 07, 1999 at 11:29:34AM -0400, Kurt D. Starsinic wrote: > secure-su is also uninstallable. > > Depends: login >=970502-1 > Current: login 19990827-5 > > Does anybody else think it's kind of nutty that 19990827-5 is less > than 970502-1? It's not less: asterix:~$ d

Re: Uninstallable Packages

1999-10-07 Thread Kurt D. Starsinic
On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 10:13:51PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > Hello world, > > I'm experimenting with a script to work out whether packages are > installable or not. I figured the world at large might be interested in > some of the results. > > The following packages are not installable (ie, t

Re: Uninstallable Packages

1999-10-06 Thread Filip Van Raemdonck
Joseph Carter wrote: > On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 10:13:51PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > > > Depends: libgl1 ; which doesn't exist > > This exists in CVS. libGL.so.1 is what is used by the latest versions of > GLX and Mesa. I think the problem was coming up with a sane way to make

Re: Uninstallable Packages

1999-10-05 Thread Joseph Carter
On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 10:13:51PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > Packages with unknown dependencies: > > clanlib0-display-fbdev-dev > clanlib0-display-ggi-dev > clanlib0-display-glx > clanlib0-display-glx-dev > clanlib0-display-svgalib-dev > clanlib0-display-x11-dev >

Re: Uninstallable Packages

1999-10-05 Thread Petr Cech
On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 10:13:51PM +1000 , Anthony Towns wrote: > Hello world, > > I'm experimenting with a script to work out whether packages are > installable or not. I figured the world at large might be interested in > some of the results. > > The following packages are not installable (ie,

Uninstallable Packages

1999-10-05 Thread Anthony Towns
Hello world, I'm experimenting with a script to work out whether packages are installable or not. I figured the world at large might be interested in some of the results. The following packages are not installable (ie, their Depends:, Recommends:, and Conflicts: can't be concurrently satisfied) u