On 7/8/20 10:45 AM, Sven Joachim wrote:
On 2020-07-08 10:20 -0400, Frank McCormick wrote:
Apt flagged a couple of errors during this morning upate.
Warnings, not errors, and they are coming from dpkg.
dpkg: warning: unable to delete old directory
'/usr/share/fonts/woff/font-awesome': Dir
On 2020-07-08 10:20 -0400, Frank McCormick wrote:
> Apt flagged a couple of errors during this morning upate.
Warnings, not errors, and they are coming from dpkg.
> dpkg: warning: unable to delete old directory
> '/usr/share/fonts/woff/font-awesome': Directory not empty dpkg:
> warning: unable t
Apt flagged a couple of errors during this morning upate.
dpkg: warning: unable to delete old directory
'/usr/share/fonts/woff/font-awesome': Directory not empty dpkg: warning:
unable to delete old directory '/usr/share/fonts/woff': Directory not
empty dpkg: warning: unable to delete old direc
On Apr 18, 2016 2:53 PM, "Eric" wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Did you try "apt-get clean" to clean the cache ?
> May be it can fix the issue.
>
>
I tried, didn't work.
I deleted all files in /var/lib/apt/lists referring to solution at this
link :
http://serverfault.com/questions/368669/debian-ubuntu-is-i
Everything was working fine yesterday. When I ran "apt-get update" today
morning, I got a lot or errors : "hash sum mismatch" and many more.
Here's the output for apt update:
Ign:1 http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable InRelease
>
> Hit:2 http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable Release
David Wright wrote:
> Quoting Bob Proulx (b...@proulx.com):
> > When the program looks up the ftp.us.debian.org name it will get all
> > three of the above in some order. If your system is IPv6 capable it
> >...
>
> Thanks for that clear exposition. I myself have had no problem with
> these differ
On Sat, 16 May 2015, Brian wrote:
A comparison of the outputs from 'apt-config dump' on both laptops might
give something.
alas no!
after copying the /etc/apt directory from laptop2 to my laptop, the only
difference is
==> diff apt-config_dump.ch8 apt-config_dump.mynb
132c132
On Fri 15 May 2015 at 22:03:59 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> Quoting Bob Proulx (b...@proulx.com):
>
> > When the program looks up the ftp.us.debian.org name it will get all
> > three of the above in some order. If your system is IPv6 capable it
> > will prefer the IPv6 address and always use it.
Quoting Bob Proulx (b...@proulx.com):
> When the program looks up the ftp.us.debian.org name it will get all
> three of the above in some order. If your system is IPv6 capable it
> will prefer the IPv6 address and always use it. If not then it will
> select one of the two IPv4 addresses and use
David Wright wrote:
> I noticed that on repeating the former, I got a very different file,
> and this might be because ftp.us.debian.org had resolved to a different
> IPv4 address (but IPv6 was the same).
$ host ftp.us.debian.org
ftp.us.debian.org has address 128.61.240.89
ftp.us.debian.org
Quoting Pierre Frenkiel (pierre.frenk...@gmail.com):
> hi David,
> At least for that problem I found the explanation, and was able to
> reproduce it on
> my personal web server. I imported the index.html from the us and fr sites,
> and the
> 3 files, Just try
>
> wget http://frenki
Brian wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > You are currently using:
> >
> > deb http://ftp.fr.debian.org/debian jessie main
> >
> > That is okay. Good! But for the purpose of this task change that to
> > a different but still valid mirror. This would be a good time to try
> > out the new http redi
On Thu, 14 May 2015, David Wright wrote:
. . .
$ wget http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/dists/jessie/main/binary-amd64/Packages
--2015-05-14 11:28:30--
http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/dists/jessie/main/binary-amd64/Packages
Resolving ftp.us.debian.org (ftp.us.debian.org)... 128.61.240.89,
64.50
Quoting Pierre Frenkiel (pierre.frenk...@gmail.com):
> On Wed, 13 May 2015, David Wright wrote:
>
> >What happens if you perform this sort of conversation:
> >. . .
> >~ $ wget
> >http://ftp.fr.debian.org/debian/dists/jessie/main/binary-amd64/Packages
> >~ $ md5sum Packages
> >~ $ wget http://ftp
On Wed 13 May 2015 at 12:55:16 -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> You are currently using:
>
> deb http://ftp.fr.debian.org/debian jessie main
>
> That is okay. Good! But for the purpose of this task change that to
> a different but still valid mirror. This would be a good time to try
> out the new
On Thu 14 May 2015 at 14:33:49 +0200, Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
> On Thu, 14 May 2015, Brian wrote:
>
> >Do we assume the problem laptop and laptop2 have the same versions of
> >apt? 'dpkg -l apt' for that.
>
> yes: 0.9.7.9+deb7u7
> It's the 1st thing I checked when I found this difference of b
Quoting Pierre Frenkiel (pierre.frenk...@gmail.com):
> On Wed, 13 May 2015, David Wright wrote:
>
> >What happens if you perform this sort of conversation:
> >. . .
> >~ $ wget
> >http://ftp.fr.debian.org/debian/dists/jessie/main/binary-amd64/Packages
> >~ $ md5sum Packages
> >~ $ wget http://ftp
On Thu, 14 May 2015, Brian wrote:
Do we assume the problem laptop and laptop2 have the same versions of
apt? 'dpkg -l apt' for that.
yes: 0.9.7.9+deb7u7
It's the 1st thing I checked when I found this difference of behaviuor.
I may-be forgot to say that the problem occurs with apt-get as
On Thu 14 May 2015 at 08:54:00 +0200, Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
> On Wed, 13 May 2015, Bob Proulx wrote:
>
> >That is okay. Good! But for the purpose of this task change that to
> >a different but still valid mirror. This would be a good time to try
> >out the new http redirector which has just r
On Wed, 13 May 2015, David Wright wrote:
What happens if you perform this sort of conversation:
. . .
~ $ wget http://ftp.fr.debian.org/debian/dists/jessie/main/binary-amd64/Packages
~ $ md5sum Packages
~ $ wget http://ftp.fr.debian.org/debian/dists/jessie/InRelease
~ $ grep 854af4d1ea9bce473bd8
On Thu, 14 May 2015, Lisi Reisz wrote:
. . .
Good point. If the redirector is not permanently available, what is the point
of it? One is surely better off with a fast, near, high availability mirror?
I suppose the answer is that newer mirrors might be even faster.
But it might be worth having
On Thursday 14 May 2015 10:20:23 Brian wrote:
> On Thu 14 May 2015 at 00:24:19 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > On Thursday 14 May 2015 00:05:44 Brian wrote:
> > > To clarify my second comment:
> > >
> > > choose-mirror (2.62) unstable; urgency=medium
> > > * Update Mirrors.masterlist
> > > *
On Thu 14 May 2015 at 00:24:19 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Thursday 14 May 2015 00:05:44 Brian wrote:
> >
> > To clarify my second comment:
> >
> > choose-mirror (2.62) unstable; urgency=medium
> > * Update Mirrors.masterlist
> > * This update includes adding httpredir.debian.org, whic
On Thursday 14 May 2015 00:51:38 Paul E Condon wrote:
> On 20150513_2054+0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > On Wednesday 13 May 2015 19:55:16 Bob Proulx wrote:
> > > Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
> > > > I have still the same problem with "Hash Sum mismatch"
> > > > Do you have any idea on how to fix it?
> >
On Wed, 13 May 2015, Bob Proulx wrote:
That is okay. Good! But for the purpose of this task change that to
a different but still valid mirror. This would be a good time to try
out the new http redirector which has just recently become an official
Debian resource.[1]
deb http://httpredir.deb
Quoting Brian (a...@cityscape.co.uk):
> On Wed 13 May 2015 at 20:54:52 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > We need to be offered this during a netinstall. I did a netinstall
> > yesterday,
> > and as usual was offered my bhoice of mirror in the UK. I chose my usual
> > because over the years it has
On 20150513_2054+0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 May 2015 19:55:16 Bob Proulx wrote:
> > Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
> > > I have still the same problem with "Hash Sum mismatch"
> > > Do you have any idea on how to fix it?
> >
> > Is your system behind a proxy cache of some sort? This pro
On Thursday 14 May 2015 00:05:44 Brian wrote:
> On Wed 13 May 2015 at 23:30:27 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > On Wednesday 13 May 2015 23:15:36 Brian wrote:
> > > On Wed 13 May 2015 at 20:54:52 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > > We need to be offered this during a netinstall. I did a netinstall
> > >
On Wed 13 May 2015 at 23:30:27 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 May 2015 23:15:36 Brian wrote:
> > On Wed 13 May 2015 at 20:54:52 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
>
> > > We need to be offered this during a netinstall. I did a netinstall
> > > yesterday, and as usual was offered my bhoice of m
On Wednesday 13 May 2015 23:15:36 Brian wrote:
> On Wed 13 May 2015 at 20:54:52 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > We need to be offered this during a netinstall. I did a netinstall
> > yesterday, and as usual was offered my bhoice of mirror in the UK. I
> > chose my usual because over the years it ha
On Wed 13 May 2015 at 20:54:52 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 May 2015 19:55:16 Bob Proulx wrote:
> > Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
> > > I have still the same problem with "Hash Sum mismatch"
> > > Do you have any idea on how to fix it?
> >
> > Is your system behind a proxy cache of some
Quoting Pierre Frenkiel (pierre.frenk...@gmail.com):
> On Wed, 13 May 2015, David Wright wrote:
>
> >After you've tried the usual things like clearing /var/lib/apt/lists
> >and trying, say, ftp.uk.debian.org in your sources.list, I'd be
> >interested whether you still get the problem if you substi
On Wednesday 13 May 2015 19:55:16 Bob Proulx wrote:
> Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
> > I have still the same problem with "Hash Sum mismatch"
> > Do you have any idea on how to fix it?
>
> Is your system behind a proxy cache of some sort? This problem is one
> sometimes seen when files of different
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 05/13/2015 05:15 AM, Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
[snip]
> Anyway, I removed them, and after that the reference to wheezy in
> apt-get update disappeared, but I have still the same problem with
> "Hash Sum mismatch" Do you have any idea on how to fix i
Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
> I have still the same problem with "Hash Sum mismatch"
> Do you have any idea on how to fix it?
Is your system behind a proxy cache of some sort? This problem is one
sometimes seen when files of different ages are cached and served
causing the entire set of files to b
On Wed, 13 May 2015, David Wright wrote:
After you've tried the usual things like clearing /var/lib/apt/lists
and trying, say, ftp.uk.debian.org in your sources.list, I'd be
interested whether you still get the problem if you substitute
http: ftp: in sources.list.
I already tried all the u
Quoting Pierre Frenkiel (pierre.frenk...@gmail.com):
> Anyway, I removed them, and after that the reference to wheezy in
> apt-get update disappeared, but I have still the same problem
> with "Hash Sum mismatch"
> Do you have any idea on how to fix it?
After you've tried the usual things
On Tue, 12 May 2015, Bob Proulx wrote:
Check for additional configuration files in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*
which I expect you to find a file referencing linux.dropbox.com
wheezy.
At a guess I expect that file to be owned by a package. *If* there is a
file there *then* this will say what pack
Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
> Get: 11 http://linux.dropbox.com wheezy/main i386 Packages [1,150 B]
>
> why these references to wheezy?
Check for additional configuration files in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*
which I expect you to find a file referencing linux.dropbox.com
wheezy.
At a guess I expect that
On Mon, 11 May 2015, Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
(unless the problem
comes from my laptop config, but I don't see how, as I have no problem with
the Wheezy sources.list)
It seems I was wrong, as I tried "apt-get update" with a jessie sources.list
on an other amd64 laptop, and I got no error.
hi everybody,
I tried to upgrade my amd64 laptop to jessie, and still have the same problem
already reported 1 month ago.
I expected that it will be fixed when Jessie became the stable release (unless
the problem
comes from my laptop config, but I don't see how, as I have no problem with the
Wh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 20:10:23 +0100
Robert Mills wrote:
> Frank McCormick wrote:
> >
> > Updating my testing system this morning.
> >
> > update-python-modules:
> > error: /usr/share/python-support/python-elementtree.public is not
> > a directory dpkg
Frank McCormick wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Updating my testing system this morning.
update-python-modules:
error: /usr/share/python-support/python-elementtree.public is not a
directory dpkg: error processing python-elementtree (--configure):
subprocess post-installati
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Updating my testing system this morning.
update-python-modules:
error: /usr/share/python-support/python-elementtree.public is not a
directory dpkg: error processing python-elementtree (--configure):
subprocess post-installation script returned error
Rob Blomquist wrote:
W: GPG error: http://ftp.debian-unofficial.org sarge Release: The following
signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available:
NO_PUBKEY D5642BC86823D007
http://www.debian-unofficial.org/faq.html
And I guess the same applies to the other ones.
I
On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 09:52:25PM +, Rob Blomquist wrote:
> W: GPG error: http://ftp.debian-unofficial.org sarge Release: The following
> signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available:
> NO_PUBKEY D5642BC86823D007
> W: GPG error: ftp://ftp.tuke.sk sarge-backports Re
W: GPG error: http://ftp.debian-unofficial.org sarge Release: The following
signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available:
NO_PUBKEY D5642BC86823D007
W: GPG error: ftp://ftp.tuke.sk sarge-backports Release: The following
signatures couldn't be verified because the publi
I think that this is probably a problem with the mirror of the Debian
repository that you are using (i.e. something on their end). In any
case, I am not getting any errors (I too use Debian Testing with
repository debian.lcs.mit.edu).
Running Debian-etch here. Has anyone else been getting these errors when
running apt-get update:
uhura:/home/robert# apt-get update
Err http://security.debian.org testing/updates Release.gpg
Connection failed [IP: 194.109.137.218 80]
Ign http://security.debian.org testing/updates Release
Ign h
On Fri, Dec 27, 2002 at 09:12:14AM -0600, Larry W. Irwin Sr. wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 23:01:57 +
> Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The redirect says to try unc.dl.sourceforge.net rather than
> > ftp3.sourceforge.net; does that help? (Although I don't understand
> > why you need
On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 23:01:57 +
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The redirect says to try unc.dl.sourceforge.net rather than
> ftp3.sourceforge.net; does that help? (Although I don't understand > why you need it
>when you already have ftp.us.debian.org.)
I put in sourceforge as a b
On Thu Dec 26, 2002 at 11:01:57PM +, the boisterous
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote to me:
> > > Err http://ftp3.sourceforge.net stable/main Packages
> > > 302 Found
> >
> > This says that the directory is found on ftp3.sf.net, but there is no
> > Packages file.
>
> Actually, it says
On Thu, Dec 26, 2002 at 05:53:44PM +0100, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
> On Thu Dec 26, 2002 at 10:44:08AM -0600, the boisterous
> Larry W. Irwin Sr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote to me:
> > Err http://ftp3.sourceforge.net stable/main Packages
> > 302 Found
>
> This says that the directory is found
On Thu Dec 26, 2002 at 10:44:08AM -0600, the boisterous
Larry W. Irwin Sr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote to me:
> Err http://ftp3.sourceforge.net stable/main Packages
> 302 Found
This says that the directory is found on ftp3.sf.net, but there is no
Packages file. I ran into this on an blackdown.org
Hi,
For at least a week or so I have been unable to get apt-get update
to go through without errors. Here is the output:
Hit http://ftp.us.debian.org stable/main Packages
Hit http://ftp.us.debian.org stable/main Release
Hit http://ftp.us.debian.org stable/contrib Packages
Hit http://ftp.us.debia
On Sun, Dec 01, 2002 at 05:23:09PM -0800, Xavian-Anderson Macpherson wrote:
> I think I read somewhere that there is a problem with one of the libraries
> causing APT-GET UPDATE to fial. I keep getting the same error; UNABLE TO
> PARSE PACKAGE FILE /VAR/LIB/DPKG/STATUS (1). I would really apprec
I think I read somewhere that there is a problem with one of the libraries
causing APT-GET UPDATE to fial. I keep getting the same error; UNABLE TO
PARSE PACKAGE FILE /VAR/LIB/DPKG/STATUS (1). I would really appreciate
someone telling me how to resolve this. I am running the testing (with some
On Wed, 27 Mar 2002 16:32:10 -0700, Michael Griffis wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I'm a new Linux user so bear with me if my questions seem elementry. I
>am having lots of fun.
>
>When running apt-get update I receive the following error:
>
>Failed to fetch
>http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US/dists/te
Hi All,
I'm a new Linux user so bear with me if my questions seem elementry. I
am having lots of fun.
When running apt-get update I receive the following error:
Failed to fetch http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US/dists/testing/non-US/main
/binary-i386/Packages Sub-process gzip returned an
On: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 10:34:04 -0500 Adam Lazur writes:
>
> Whenever I run "apt-get update" with slink stuff in my sources.list
> I end up getting like 20 errors similar to:
>
> Get ftp://ftp.debian.org slink/main makedev [16.1k]
> Error ftp://ftp.debian.org slink/main makedev
> 550 /debian/dists/
Thus spake Adam Lazur ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Whenever I run "apt-get update" with slink stuff in my sources.list I
> ^ doh, I meant "apt-get upgrade" after I run
> "apt-get update"
fixed it by switching my slink site to ftp1.us.debian.org
.adam
--
Ada
Thus spake Adam Lazur ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Whenever I run "apt-get update" with slink stuff in my sources.list I
^ doh, I meant "apt-get upgrade" after I run
"apt-get update"
.adam
--
Adam Lazur - Computer Engineering Undergrad - Lehigh University
Whenever I run "apt-get update" with slink stuff in my sources.list I
end up getting like 20 errors similar to:
Get ftp://ftp.debian.org slink/main makedev [16.1k]
Error ftp://ftp.debian.org slink/main makedev
550 /debian/dists/unstable/main/binary-i386/base/makedev_2.3.1-4.deb:
not a plain file
63 matches
Mail list logo
