Re: Upgrade Problem

Am Freitag, 4. Januar 2019 schrieb Richard Hector: > On 4/01/19 9:49 PM, Andy Smith wrote: > > Stephen, I think you're going to have to analyse where the space is > > being used. If you use a graphical desktop then there might be a > > graphical application that can help with this. On GNOME it's ca

Re: Upgrade Problem

On 2019-01-07 02:56, John Crawley wrote: On 06/01/2019 00.26, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, January 04, 2019 08:21:30 PM David Wright wrote: On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 14:02:27 (-0500), Stephen P. Molnar wrote: Having babbled for the last two paragraphs, I'll close buy saying that I will

Re: Upgrade Problem

On 06/01/2019 00.26, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, January 04, 2019 08:21:30 PM David Wright wrote: On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 14:02:27 (-0500), Stephen P. Molnar wrote: Having babbled for the last two paragraphs, I'll close buy saying that I will revert to the entire installation on the sa

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Friday, January 04, 2019 08:21:30 PM David Wright wrote: > On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 14:02:27 (-0500), Stephen P. Molnar wrote: > > Having babbled for the last two paragraphs, I'll close buy saying that > > I will revert to the entire installation on the same partition. > > I would advise you to k

Re: Upgrade Problem

Michael Stone wrote: > songbird wrote: >>Roberto C Sánchez wrote: >>> It might also indicate files that exist (i.e., occupy blocks) without >>> having directory entries. For example, this is the case when a program >>> creates a temporary file, gets the descritor back from the syscall, then >>> i

Re: Upgrade Problem

On 05/01/2019 01:15, Felix Miata wrote: > David Wright composed on 2019-01-04 19:21 (UTC-0600): > >> Ignoring /home as it dwarfs / in size, it would be very easy to make a >> mistake if you take an existing installation and hive off the /tmp and >> /var into separate partitions. The problem boils d

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 05:04:49PM -0500, songbird wrote: > Roberto C Sánchez wrote: > ... > > It might also indicate files that exist (i.e., occupy blocks) without > > having directory entries. For example, this is the case when a program > > creates a temporary file, gets the descritor back fro

Re: Overhead of LVM (Re: Upgrade Problem)

Hi. On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 11:03:48PM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, January 04, 2019 08:23:59 AM Reco wrote: > > # pvs > > PV VG Fmt Attr PSize PFree > > /dev/md10 naslvm2 a-- 14.55t 10.43t > > > > # hdparm -Tt /dev/md10 > > /dev/md10: > >

Re: Overhead of LVM (Re: Upgrade Problem)

On Friday, January 04, 2019 08:23:59 AM Reco wrote: > # pvs > PV VG Fmt Attr PSize PFree > /dev/md10 naslvm2 a-- 14.55t 10.43t > > # hdparm -Tt /dev/md10 > /dev/md10: > Timing cached reads: 1224 MB in 2.00 seconds = 612.05 MB/sec > Timing buffered disk reads: 1

Re: Upgrade Problem

David Wright composed on 2019-01-04 19:21 (UTC-0600): > On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 14:02:27 (-0500), Stephen P. Molnar wrote: >> Felix Miata wrote: >>> Stephen P. Molnar composed on 2019-01-04 12:57 (UTC-0500): I haven't messed around with partitioning since the early days of Slackware, an

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 14:02:27 (-0500), Stephen P. Molnar wrote: > On 01/04/2019 01:11 PM, Felix Miata wrote: > > Stephen P. Molnar composed on 2019-01-04 12:57 (UTC-0500): > > > > > I haven't messed around with partitioning since the early days of > > > Slackware, and that was with a great deal o

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 16:18:03 (-0500), Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 02:39:40PM -0600, David Wright wrote: > > > > There's at least one other scenario that it would be worth eliminating > > by checking that this equation is true (allowing for filesystem overheads): > > > >

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 05:04:49PM -0500, songbird wrote: Roberto C Sánchez wrote: It might also indicate files that exist (i.e., occupy blocks) without having directory entries. For example, this is the case when a program creates a temporary file, gets the descritor back from the syscall, th

Re: Upgrade Problem

Roberto C Sánchez wrote: ... > It might also indicate files that exist (i.e., occupy blocks) without > having directory entries. For example, this is the case when a program > creates a temporary file, gets the descritor back from the syscall, then > immediatley calls unlink on it. The file desc

Re: Upgrade Problem

David Wright wrote: > On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 17:13:44 (+), Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: >> On sex, 04 jan 2019, David Wright wrote: >> > On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 16:52:45 (+), Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: >> > > And in this case, the problem is easy to solve: >> > > rm /path/to/some/large/files

Re: Upgrade Problem

Joe wrote: > Reinstalling looks good until you've done it, the old installation is > history, and over the next few weeks you realise how much time you had > spent over the last few years tweaking your computer to get it the way > you like it. > > And no, you cannot at the same time a) clear out

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 02:39:40PM -0600, David Wright wrote: > > There's at least one other scenario that it would be worth eliminating > by checking that this equation is true (allowing for filesystem overheads): > > # du -shx > + > $ df's Available > ≃ > partition's size.

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 14:02:27 -0500, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: > On 01/04/2019 01:11 PM, Felix Miata wrote: > > Stephen P. Molnar composed on 2019-01-04 12:57 (UTC-0500): > > > > > I haven't messed around with partitioning since the early days of > > > Slackware, and that was with a great deal of

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 17:13:44 (+), Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: > On sex, 04 jan 2019, David Wright wrote: > > On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 16:52:45 (+), Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: > > > And in this case, the problem is easy to solve: > > > rm /path/to/some/large/files/* > > > > Wrong again. T

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Fri, 04 Jan 2019 20:46:53 +0100 deloptes wrote: > > I asked why he does not reinstall, but didn't get meaningful answer - > only, I can not do it and it takes too much time. > > One can not argue with educated people, so I gave up. > This is just an example how it works for most of the peop

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 13:41:33 (-0500), Felix Miata wrote: > David Wright composed on 2019-01-04 10:19 (UTC-0600): > > > On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 04:30:00 (-0500), Felix Miata wrote: > > >>> This partitioning scheme seems really odd and unwieldy. > > >> Indeed. Considering the absence of a sysadm

Re: Upgrade Problem

On 4/01/19 9:49 PM, Andy Smith wrote: > Stephen, I think you're going to have to analyse where the space is > being used. If you use a graphical desktop then there might be a > graphical application that can help with this. On GNOME it's called > Disk Usage Analyzer. On the command line you could t

Re: Upgrade Problem

On 01/04/2019 01:11 PM, Felix Miata wrote: Stephen P. Molnar composed on 2019-01-04 12:57 (UTC-0500): I haven't messed around with partitioning since the early days of Slackware, and that was with a great deal of trepidation? You just multiplied my curiosity about what exactly was responsib

Re: Upgrade Problem

David Wright composed on 2019-01-04 10:19 (UTC-0600): > On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 04:30:00 (-0500), Felix Miata wrote: >>> This partitioning scheme seems really odd and unwieldy. >> Indeed. Considering the absence of a sysadmin, > What's so unusual about that? Standing alone, absolutely nothing,

Re: Upgrade Problem

Stephen P. Molnar wrote: > I want to thank those of you who responded to my request for assistance. > > A number of the replies, particularly those that did not editorialize, > where useful in that they convinced me that reinstalling the OS is the > simplest remedy for the problems. > > Let us pu

Re: Upgrade Problem

Stephen P. Molnar composed on 2019-01-04 12:57 (UTC-0500): > I haven't messed around with partitioning since the early days of > Slackware, and that was with a great deal of trepidation? You just multiplied my curiosity about what exactly was responsible for your current partitioning scheme, n

Re: Upgrade Problem

On 01/04/2019 12:13 PM, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 05:47:07PM +0100, steve wrote: Le vendredi 04 janvier 2019, Stephen P. Molnar a écrit : where useful in that they convinced me that reinstalling the OS is the simplest remedy for the problems. You're welcome. But th

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 05:47:07PM +0100, steve wrote: > Le vendredi 04 janvier 2019, Stephen P. Molnar a écrit : > > > > where useful in that they convinced me that reinstalling the OS is the > > simplest remedy for the problems. > > You're welcome. But this last sentence is pretty sad because

Re: Upgrade Problem

On sex, 04 jan 2019, David Wright wrote: On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 16:52:45 (+), Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: And in this case, the problem is easy to solve: rm /path/to/some/large/files/* Wrong again. The free space on /home is sufficient to hold 10 copies of the entire / filesystem. And you

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 16:52:45 (+), Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: > On sex, 04 jan 2019, steve wrote: > > > where useful in that they convinced me that reinstalling the > > > OS is the simplest remedy for the problems. > > > > You're welcome. But this last sentence is pretty sad because normally

Re: Upgrade Problem

On sex, 04 jan 2019, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: And in this case, the problem is easy to solve: rm /path/to/some/large/files/* The usual suspects (/var/logs, /var/cache, etc) have already been mentioned, and are in a different partition. One place to investigate is /lib/modules. It can g

Re: Upgrade Problem

On sex, 04 jan 2019, steve wrote: where useful in that they convinced me that reinstalling the OS is the simplest remedy for the problems. You're welcome. But this last sentence is pretty sad because normally, issues like yours do not require windows-style operation. For your info, I have not

Re: Upgrade Problem

Le vendredi 04 janvier 2019, Stephen P. Molnar a écrit : where useful in that they convinced me that reinstalling the OS is the simplest remedy for the problems. You're welcome. But this last sentence is pretty sad because normally, issues like yours do not require windows-style operation. Fo

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 04:30:00 (-0500), Felix Miata wrote: > Andy Smith composed on 2019-01-04 08:57 (UTC): > > Several people have now suggested saving space in a bits of the > > filesystem that Stephen has on dedicated partitions, so this is not > > helpful. > > > This partitioning scheme seems

Re: Upgrade Problem

I want to thank those of you who responded to my request for assistance. A number of the replies, particularly those that did not editorialize, where useful in that they convinced me that reinstalling the OS is the simplest remedy for the problems. Let us put this thread to bed and stop wasti

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 02:38:09PM -0500, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: On 01/03/2019 01:27 PM, songbird wrote: apt-get install libc --reinstall root@AbNormal:/home/comp# apt-get install libc --reinstall Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done E: Una

Re: Overhead of LVM (Re: Upgrade Problem)

Hi. On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 08:13:38AM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, January 04, 2019 03:49:37 AM Andy Smith wrote: > > It's unfortunate that LVM was not used as it would make juggling > > space between the multiple filesystems a lot easier. Oh well. > > I guess I should c

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 10:42:57AM +, Brian wrote: > 2. Then go through > >dpkg -l | less > >line by line, asking "do I really need that?". I'd not bother with >looking at the library packages. Tedious? Yes, like tidying the boot >of a car. There are some tools that will show

Overhead of LVM (Re: Upgrade Problem)

On Friday, January 04, 2019 03:49:37 AM Andy Smith wrote: > It's unfortunate that LVM was not used as it would make juggling > space between the multiple filesystems a lot easier. Oh well. I guess I should consider using LVM on my next install. Does it incur any overhead during normal disk opera

Re: Upgrade Problem

Hi. On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 10:42:57AM +, Brian wrote: > On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 08:57:18 +, Andy Smith wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 02:47:52AM +, Matthew Crews wrote: > > > My guess? /home is on the same partition as /, which is a common setup > > > for

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 08:57:18 +, Andy Smith wrote: > Hello, > > On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 02:47:52AM +, Matthew Crews wrote: > > My guess? /home is on the same partition as /, which is a common setup > > for most end users. Running lsblk is one way to tell if this is the case. > > >From o

Re: Upgrade Problem

Felix Miata (2019-01-03): > As others have noted, this is your root if not entire problem. There is still the very worrying problem that ldconfig reported "ENOENT 2 No such file or directory" instead of "ENOSPC 28 No space left on device". This is a bug, it should be reported. Regards, -- Nic

Re: Upgrade Problem

Andy Smith composed on 2019-01-04 08:57 (UTC): > Several people have now suggested saving space in a bits of the > filesystem that Stephen has on dedicated partitions, so this is not > helpful. > This partitioning scheme seems really odd and unwieldy. Indeed. Considering the absence of a sysad

Re: Upgrade Problem

Hello, On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 02:47:52AM +, Matthew Crews wrote: > My guess? /home is on the same partition as /, which is a common setup > for most end users. Running lsblk is one way to tell if this is the case. >From one of Stephen's earlier emails: root@AbNormal:/home/comp# df -hl Files

Re: Upgrade Problem

Hello, On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 10:47:26PM -0500, Felix Miata wrote: > Stephen P. Molnar composed on 2019-01-03 15:39 (UTC-0500): > > > root@AbNormal:/home/comp# df -hl > > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > ... > > /dev/sda123G 23G 0 100% / > > As others have noted,

Re: Upgrade Problem

Stephen P. Molnar composed on 2019-01-03 15:39 (UTC-0500): > root@AbNormal:/home/comp# df -hl > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on ... > /dev/sda123G 23G 0 100% / As others have noted, this is your root if not entire problem. du -h on Stretch host fi965 here: Filesyst

Re: Upgrade Problem

On 1/3/19 7:09 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote: > I see from a later response that your / partition is 100% full. That > will defintely cause problems. Whether it's THE problem, we won't know > until you clean out / to less than 100%, say at least 90%. Less would > be better. > > I don't know why your

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 12:37:36 -0500 "Stephen P. Molnar" wrote: > On 01/03/2019 12:19 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 09:54:44 -0500 > > "Stephen P. Molnar" wrote: > > > >> I am running Debian Stretch and have just encountered a problem during > >> a routine apt-get dist-upgrade

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 01:58:10PM -0600, David Wright wrote: > Yes, but we don't. Type "df" without the quotes. Hell, even WITH the quotes it'll still work!

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Thu 03 Jan 2019 at 14:38:09 (-0500), Stephen P. Molnar wrote: > On 01/03/2019 01:27 PM, songbird wrote: > > apt-get install libc --reinstall > > root@AbNormal:/home/comp# apt-get install libc --reinstall > Reading package lists... Done > Building dependency tree > Reading state information... D

Re: Upgrade Problem

On 01/03/2019 01:27 PM, songbird wrote: apt-get install libc --reinstall root@AbNormal:/home/comp# apt-get install libc --reinstall Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done E: Unable to locate package libc so far as I know, I am not out of spa

Re: Upgrade Problem

Stephen P. Molnar wrote: > I am running Debian Stretch and have just encountered a problem during > a routine apt-get dist-upgrade. > > Specifically, it failed with the following error messages. > > E: libc-bin: subprocess installed post-installation script returned > error exit status 1 > > Ple

Re: Upgrade Problem

On 01/03/2019 12:19 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote: On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 09:54:44 -0500 "Stephen P. Molnar" wrote: I am running Debian Stretch and have just encountered a problem during a routine apt-get dist-upgrade. Specifically, it failed with the following error messages. E: libc-bin: subpro

Re: Upgrade Problem

On 01/03/2019 11:43 AM, Brad Rogers wrote: On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 17:33:20 +0100 steve wrote: Hello steve, had the same problem. It seems su behaviour has changed recently. I It changed several months ago. I got notification 8 Aug 2018. As you go on to point out, 'su -' should permit OP to

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 17:33:20 +0100 steve wrote: Hello steve, >had the same problem. It seems su behaviour has changed recently. I It changed several months ago. I got notification 8 Aug 2018. As you go on to point out, 'su -' should permit OP to update without problem. -- Regards _

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 09:54:44 -0500 "Stephen P. Molnar" wrote: > I am running Debian Stretch and have just encountered a problem during > a routine apt-get dist-upgrade. > > Specifically, it failed with the following error messages. > > E: libc-bin: subprocess installed post-installation script

Re: d-i partion size defaults insufficient (was ... Re: upgrade problem)

On 07/02/14 19:17, Roelof Wobben wrote: > >> Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 14:25:47 +1100 >> From: scott.ferguson.debian.u...@gmail.com >> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org >> Subject: Re: d-i partion size defaults insufficient (was

RE: d-i partion size defaults insufficient (was ... Re: upgrade problem)

> Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 14:25:47 +1100 > From: scott.ferguson.debian.u...@gmail.com > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Subject: Re: d-i partion size defaults insufficient (was ... Re: upgrade > problem) > > On 07/02/14 14:07,

Re: d-i partion size defaults insufficient (was ... Re: upgrade problem)

On 07/02/14 14:25, Scott Ferguson wrote: > On 07/02/14 14:07, Chris Bannister wrote: >> CC'ing debian-boot >> >> Seems as though Roelof is now in space trouble. >> He says he followed the d-i's suggestions >> Thread starts here: >> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/02/msg00269.html >> >> On

Re: d-i partion size defaults insufficient (was ... Re: upgrade problem)

On 07/02/14 14:07, Chris Bannister wrote: > CC'ing debian-boot > > Seems as though Roelof is now in space trouble. > He says he followed the d-i's suggestions > Thread starts here: > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/02/msg00269.html > > On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 01:08:39PM +, Roelof Wo

d-i partion size defaults insufficient (was ... Re: upgrade problem)

CC'ing debian-boot Seems as though Roelof is now in space trouble. He says he followed the d-i's suggestions Thread starts here: https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/02/msg00269.html On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 01:08:39PM +, Roelof Wobben wrote: > > Was that the default partitioning layout s

RE: upgrade problem

> Was that the default partitioning layout suggested by the installer? Yes, it is. > I notice that you only have 85M free under / which includes /lib. > e.g. > root@tal:~# du -h /lib/modules/ | tail -n 3 > 81M /lib/modules/3.2.0-4-686-pae/kernel > 84M /lib/modules/3.2.0-4-686-pae > 84M /lib/mod

Re: upgrade problem

On 02/05/2014 04:16 PM, Roelof Wobben wrote: > When I did today apt-get dist-upgrade it fails with this message : > > Preconfiguring packages ... > (Reading database ... 146026 files and directories currently installed.) > Preparing to unpack .../linux-image-3.12-1-amd64_3.12.9-1_amd64.deb ...

Re: Upgrade problem

On 17/02/12 02:41, Mika Suomalainen wrote: > Hi, > > According to the manual page, dist-upgrade is alias for full-upgrade. Yes. It is a recognised synonym with aptitude - it *also* works with apt. > > Lisi wrote: > > >> Lisi > > Kind regards -- Iceweasel/Firefox extensions for f

Re: Upgrade problem

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, According to the manual page, dist-upgrade is alias for full-upgrade. Lisi wrote: >On Thursday 16 February 2012 10:06:29 Scott Ferguson wrote: >> On 16/02/12 20:27, Petr Osanve Vytovtov wrote: >> > Hello! >> > >> > I use Debian testing amd64

Re: Upgrade problem

On Thursday 16 February 2012 10:06:29 Scott Ferguson wrote: > On 16/02/12 20:27, Petr Osanve Vytovtov wrote: > > Hello! > > > > I use Debian testing amd64 and I have next problem. > > When I write command "aptitude upgrade" it returns next: > > /Resolving dependencies... > > No packages will be ins

Re: Upgrade problem

On 02/16/12 13:59, Umarzuki Mochlis wrote: Pada 16 Februari 2012 5:27 PTG, Petr Osanve Vytovtov menulis: Hello! I use Debian testing amd64 and I have next problem. When I write command "aptitude upgrade" it returns next: Resolving dependencies... No packages will be installed, upgraded, or re

Re: Upgrade problem

On 16/02/12 20:27, Petr Osanve Vytovtov wrote: > Hello! > > I use Debian testing amd64 and I have next problem. > When I write command "aptitude upgrade" it returns next: > /Resolving dependencies... > No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed. > 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0

Re: Upgrade problem

Pada 16 Februari 2012 5:27 PTG, Petr Osanve Vytovtov menulis: > Hello! > > I use Debian testing amd64 and I have next problem. > When I write command "aptitude upgrade" it returns next: > Resolving dependencies... > No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed. > 0 packages upgraded, 0 newl

Re: upgrade problem [SOLVED]

On 20 April 2009 02:57:57 Alex Samad wrote: > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 12:14:45AM +0200, Thierry Chatelet wrote: > > HI list, > > Igot a package, acpid, which does not want to upgrade. I tried to remove > > it, > > me 2, try add exit 0 to /etc/init.d/acpid on the second line (after > stopping the se

Re: upgrade problem

On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 12:14:45AM +0200, Thierry Chatelet wrote: > HI list, > Igot a package, acpid, which does not want to upgrade. I tried to remove it, me 2, try add exit 0 to /etc/init.d/acpid on the second line (after stopping the services), then try the upgrade again > re-install it but n

Re: Upgrade problem: "dpkg: 'x' not found on PATH"

I was able to fix it. Apparently if the error occurs, it doesn't install the package at all. So I put the necessary dirs in root's path and ran 'aptitude install' again for the failed packages and it was ok. Thanks. Nick -- Nick's Auditorium: http://users.pandora.be/nicks_auditorium History of an

Re: Upgrade problem: "dpkg: 'x' not found on PATH"

I was able to fix it. Apparently if the error occurs, it doesn't install the package at all. So I put the necessary dirs in root's path and ran 'aptitude install' again for the failed packages and it was ok. Thanks. Nick -- Nick's Auditorium: http://users.pandora.be/nicks_auditorium History of an

Re: Upgrade problem: "dpkg: 'x' not found on PATH"

I was able to fix it. Apparently if the error occurs, it doesn't install the package at all. So I put the necessary dirs in root's path and ran 'aptitude install' again for the failed packages and it was ok. Thanks. Nick -- Nick's Auditorium: http://users.pandora.be/nicks_auditorium History of an

Re: Upgrade problem: "dpkg: 'x' not found on PATH"

I was able to fix it. Apparently if the error occurs, it doesn't install the package at all. So I put the necessary dirs in root's path and ran 'aptitude install' again for the failed packages and it was ok. Thanks. Nick -- Nick's Auditorium: http://users.pandora.be/nicks_auditorium History of an

Re: Upgrade problem: "dpkg: 'x' not found on PATH"

On Wed, Sep 26, 2007 at 01:44:09PM +0200, Nick De Graeve wrote: > I'm trying to upgrade a Sarge box to Etch and several "dpkg: `x' not > found on PATH"-errors occured. > > I followed the instructions in the release notes > (http://www.nl.debian.org/releases/etch/i386/release-notes/ch- > upgrading.

Re: Upgrade problem with updating fontconfig cache

Hi Pete, recently i got the same error. you have to remove the /usr/X11R6/lib line from your /etc/ld.so.conf and run ldconfig afterwards. i think the library directory X11R6 is no longer used in recent debian systems and there are residing old librarys which don't contain that symbol. hope it wor

[RESOLVED] Re: Re: upgrade problem

On 2005-09-28T13:40-0400 Filipus Klutiero wrote: >> To reply to the list, check for example the "*Reply to:*" >> "debian-user@lists.debian.org >> " >> on http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2005/09/msg02773.html >> That works

Re: upgrade problem

Hi Kai, more useful or compact than apt-cache show would be $ apt-cache policy perl However you apt-cache show seems to indicate you have a sarge/sid mix. Since apt-get install perl indicates your perl is up-to-date for your default release, I don't see why apt-get upgrade would be upgrading it

Re: Upgrade Problem..

On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 15:16:20 + (GMT), Richard wrote: > > " Unpacking replacement Joe... > /var/lib/dpkg/info/joe.potrm: line 3: /usr/bin/update-menus: > Permission denied > After this 'apt-get upgrade' dies altogether thus causing the whole > upgrade to die.  Can't install Joe or remove it.  

Re: Upgrade Problem..

Kent > Richard wrote: > > " Unpacking replacement Joe... > > /var/lib/dpkg/info/joe.potrm: line 3: /usr/bin/update-menus: > > Permission denied > > Can you manually run /usr/bin/update-menus? Yes, that's fine. > Look at line 3 of /var/lib/dpkg/info/jog.potrm and see if there's > anything odd-

Re: Upgrade Problem..

Richard wrote: " Unpacking replacement Joe... /var/lib/dpkg/info/joe.potrm: line 3: /usr/bin/update-menus: Permission denied Can you manually run /usr/bin/update-menus? Look at line 3 of /var/lib/dpkg/info/jog.potrm and see if there's anything odd-looking there or in the immediate vicinity. --

Re: Upgrade problem with kernel and modutils

> > I was trying to upgrade my system the other day and apt-get upgrade > first tells me that my modutils can't be configured since my kernel > sturcture has changed. I figured nothing of but now it's not just > modutils it's initrd-tools and modconf as well. I tried upgrading to a > new kernel

Re: Upgrade Problem

On Sat, May 27, 2000 at 09:17:18PM -0700, Jay Kelly wrote: > Hello Guys, I have a qestion on Xwindows. I had it working great with > Slink, Then I upgraded my box to Potato. Now when I try to start X I > receive an error: > > "Fatal server error: could not open font `fixed` Common error... > So

Re: upgrade problem

On Fri, 30 Apr 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hello! > > I have upgraded from slink to potato. > But something happend. I could not start X > after the upgrade. So I decided to config > XF86Config again. When I type XF86Setup I have > got following error : _X11TransSocketUNIXConnect- > Can't co

RE: upgrade problem

I'm not a potato user, but it should as if you have a font path in your xf86config that does not exist anymore, or possible has moved from it slink placement to it potato placement. This happened to me with truetype fonts placement from hamm to slink. Check on that. Hope it helps. Rod... > -