'sid' and 'Testing' caveats

Forum Forums News Sid Upgraders 'sid' and 'Testing' caveats

  • This topic has 48 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated Mar 1-1:22 pm by anticapitalista.
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 49 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #32381
    Member
    fungalnetfungalnet

    Thank you skidoo.
    So, with the help of anticapitalista I begun to unravel what went wrong and how to “fix it”.

    
    # ls -altr /var/cache/apt/archives/gparted*
    -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1.9M Aug 29  2018 /var/cache/apt/archives/gparted_0.32.0-2_amd64.deb
    -rw-r--r-- 1 root root  39K Dec 19 05:29 /var/cache/apt/archives/gpart_1%3a0.3-7_amd64.deb
    # dpkg -i  /var/cache/apt/archives/gparted_0.32.0-2_amd64.deb
    Selecting previously unselected package gparted.
    (Reading database ... 149780 files and directories currently installed.)
    Preparing to unpack .../gparted_0.32.0-2_amd64.deb ...
    Unpacking gparted (0.32.0-2) ...
    dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of gparted:
     gparted depends on libparted-fs-resize0 (>= 3.1); however:
      Package libparted-fs-resize0 is not installed.
    dpkg: error processing package gparted (--install):
     dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
    Processing triggers for desktop-file-utils (0.24-1) ...
    Processing triggers for mime-support (3.64) ...
    Processing triggers for hicolor-icon-theme (0.17-2) ...
    Errors were encountered while processing:
     gparted
    

    no, because it was autopurged once gparted was removed so the devil doesn’t intrude.

    
    # ls -altr /var/cache/apt/archives/ libparted-fs-re*   
    -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 215K Oct 11 13:42 /var/cache/apt/archives/libparted-fs-resize0_3.3-1_amd64.deb
    -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 215K Jan 20 02:29 /var/cache/apt/archives/libparted-fs-resize0_3.3-3_amd64.deb
    

    So I use the latest I have:

    # dpkg -i /var/cache/apt/archives/libparted-fs-resize0_3.3-3_amd64.deb
    Selecting previously unselected package libparted-fs-resize0:amd64.
    (Reading database ... 149949 files and directories currently installed.)
    Preparing to unpack .../libparted-fs-resize0_3.3-3_amd64.deb ...
    Unpacking libparted-fs-resize0:amd64 (3.3-3) ...
    Setting up libparted-fs-resize0:amd64 (3.3-3) ...
    Processing triggers for libc-bin (2.29-9) ...
    

    Then try gparted again to see if it is missing another dependency

    # dpkg -i  /var/cache/apt/archives/gparted_0.32.0-2_amd64.deb         
    (Reading database ... 149955 files and directories currently installed.)
    Preparing to unpack .../gparted_0.32.0-2_amd64.deb ...
    Unpacking gparted (0.32.0-2) over (0.32.0-2) ...
    Setting up gparted (0.32.0-2) ...
    Processing triggers for desktop-file-utils (0.24-1) ...
    Processing triggers for mime-support (3.64) ...
    Processing triggers for hicolor-icon-theme (0.17-2) ...
    # apt search gparted 
    Sorting... Done
    Full Text Search... Done
    drobo-utils/unstable,unstable 0.6.1+repack-2 all
      manage data robotics storage units (drobos)
    gparted/unstable 1.0.0-0.1 amd64 [upgradable from: 0.32.0-2]
      GNOME partition editor
    gparted-common/unstable,unstable 1.0.0-0.1 all
      GNOME partition editor -- common data
    partitionmanager/unstable 4.0.0-2 amd64
      file, disk and partition management for KDE
    
    
    # apt-get upgrade
    Reading package lists... Done
    Building dependency tree       
    Reading state information... Done
    Calculating upgrade... Done
    The following packages have been kept back:
      gparted
    0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded.
    
    # apt-get dist-upgrade
    Reading package lists... Done
    Building dependency tree       
    Reading state information... Done
    Calculating upgrade... Done
    The following package was automatically installed and is no longer required:
      libxvmc1
    Use 'sudo apt autoremove' to remove it.
    The following packages will be REMOVED:
      eudev libelogind0 prevent-systemd sysvinit-core xserver-xorg-core xserver-xorg-input-libinput
      xserver-xorg-video-intel
    The following NEW packages will be installed:
      gparted-common libargon2-1 libcryptsetup12 libgtkmm-3.0-1v5 libjson-c4 libpam-systemd
      libpolkit-agent-1-0 libpolkit-gobject-1-0 libsystemd0 policykit-1 systemd systemd-sysv
    The following packages will be upgraded:
      gparted
    1 upgraded, 12 newly installed, 7 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
    Need to get 7,956 kB/8,434 kB of archives.
    After this operation, 5,484 kB of additional disk space will be used.
    Do you want to continue? [Y/n] n
    Abort.
    
    #32382
    Member
    fungalnetfungalnet

    Gparted does
    depend on policykit so without elogind or consolekit might be the reason for trying to pull
    systemd in on sid.

    Your post came in while I was editing the above. It seems as the dependencies for this new and exciting gparted 0.33–>1.0 is requiring all this “crap” which I choose not to ever use, as long as I had a choice.

    I hate having solutions and patches like what I did above as I think it eventually catches up with you and it becomes a dirty system. Somewhere some indirect dependency will rely on a library that is in common with a newer dependency that will be incompatible and you can’t have two of the same kind. I think in that next step of breakage is where I step off the fight. I know I can still use fdisk and parted without the gui stuff probably without elogind or consolekit, it is just quicker when you have too many partitions that you can’t possibly remember where each one is (sda23|sda11|sda24|sda19) spatially.

    I have three clones of the same installation, one is running conventionally, one with runit (based on the late runit beta image) and one running s6/66. It has been more exciting in the past few months than it has been for years, but this crap is tiring me out. I think this is where I will step off the bandwagon and wish the best to all of you. I’d rather devote my time in real politics and writing than be fighting apt every other day to keep up a minimalistic distribution. I always run synaptic/gparted with sudo from terminal, I don’t need no stinking logind running checking on me. A few months ago we lost synaptic, now it is gparted. I may try one last 32bit new installation and use as a single core 32bit virtual image, just for kicks.

    In solidarity, always.

    PS Gparted and octopi-xbps work fine in void without elogind or consolekit 🙂

    
    # xbps-query -Rs gparted 
    [*] gparted-1.0.0_1 Gnome Partition Editor
    
    # xbps-query -Rs consolek
    [-] ConsoleKit2-1.2.1_2       A framework for defining and tracking users, login sessions, and seats
    [-] ConsoleKit2-devel-1.2.1_2 A framework for defining and tracking users, login sessions, and seats -...
    
    # xbps-query -Rs elogind 
    [-] dbus-elogind-1.12.16_1      Message bus system (built with elogind support)
    [-] dbus-elogind-libs-1.12.16_1 Message bus system (built with elogind support) - shared libraries
    [-] dbus-elogind-x11-1.12.16_1  Message bus system (built with elogind support) - X11 support
    [-] elogind-243.4_1             Standalone logind fork
    [-] elogind-devel-243.4_1       Standalone logind fork - development files
    [-] libelogind-243.4_1          Standalone logind fork - elogind library
    [-] polkit-elogind-0.116_3      Authorization Toolkit (transitional dummy package)
    #32388
    AvatarAnonymous

    Just for the record:

    1.apt has NEVER cleared the cache on its own!
    This is ALWAYS the command
    apt clean or apt-get clean necessary

    2.apt resolves ALL dependencies itself, while dpkg -i NEVER does.
    Since ‘synaptic’ works with dpkg, I would place your problems there.

    3.apt upgrade
    upgrade is used to obtain available upgrades for all packages currently installed on the system from the sources configured in the sources.list(5) to install. New packages are installed if necessary to satisfy dependencies, but existing packages are NEVER removed. If the upgrade for a package requires that an installed package be removed, the upgrade will not be performed.

    apt dist-upgrade (full-upgrade)
    full-upgrade performs the function of “upgrade”, but will also remove installed packages if necessary to upgrade the system as a whole.

    4.Unstable (sid) is called unstable, not because it’s prone to crashes, but because of how often it changes
    To make the best of sid, it is wise to full-upgrade every day, some people do it once or twice a week, after 2 weeks, you keep the pieces
    The unstable (sid) repositories are updated every 6 hours. This happens in debian 4 times per day, each versus 05:00, 11:00, 17:00 and 23:00 and why full-upgrades are important on a daily basis.
    https://forum.siduction.org/index.php?topic=7660.msg62343#msg62343

    5.sudo
    is frowned upon in sid. Here you work with
    su –

    #32390
    Member
    fungalnetfungalnet

    1 Skidoo got it, this is what changed about 1.5y ago between apt/apt-get behavior. apt clean clears the cache. apt as default for this recent time has changed to remove the package that was just installed on one to one basis, not clear the whole cache. While apt-get doesn’t (by default). I noticed this when it changed right away as I keep the cache in separate partition, so for multiple flavors I don’t have to redownload the same pkg several times. Apt clean is a very different procedure.

    2 As you see above when I first tried dpkg -i gparted…xxxx.deb dpkg knew exactly what dependency was missing and asked for it before it can install gparted. So I went back, found it in cache and reinstalled it, then repeated dpkg with gparted and it was happy. So give some credit to dpkg, it is good. NEVER SAY NEVER 🙂 Just look up my previous logs to see that it does, and ONCE cancels out NEVER everyday 🙂

    3 Like I said, upgrade is legally blind, it doesn’t care whether you are on wheezy (poor baby) or sid, it just upgrades pkg by pkg version by version. dist-upgrade will propose to remove AND ADD software based on the structure of the particular edition. If you don’t use dist-upgrade on the long run you are ending up with some sort of frankenstein edition hovering between stable, testing, unstable as a custom installation of a group of pkgs.

    4 Without disputing what you say, what is happening in gparted 1.0 in sid today, it will happen in a few days in testing, and will happen in a few more days in buster, stretch, and even old stable. In arch 1.1 is stable, and in void 1.0 works without ck or elogind. In devuan since they control the flow of debian repositories they have pinned the 0.32 edition so they don’t have to deal with it. Ceres (sid) is a neglected illegitimate child for them.

    5 Bottom line is that if I have to use elogind in Antix I have no reason in using antix anymore. It was the reason I was in antix. Sorry. Sorry that I don’t have the adequate knowhow to repackage and offer a cleaner solution proposed for the antix repository. There is also gparted-common in this equation, which appears to be a new split of the gparted package.

    #32409
    Forum Admin
    anticapitalistaanticapitalista

    I have just packaged a policykit-1-free version of gparted (and synaptic).
    Hopefully in the repos soon.

    Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.

    antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

    #32412
    Member
    fungalnetfungalnet

    I would like to say thank you personally but I think antix deserves this

    #32424
    Member
    fungalnetfungalnet

    It is a revived joy, to be doing upgrades from the terminal while opening up synaptic as a user to browse at the same time 🙂 No rights to change anything. In openbox/lxde (if lxpolkit was running) this hasn’t happened since about debian6 I think.

    • This reply was modified 6 months, 1 week ago by fungalnet.
    #32427
    Member
    AvatarModdIt

    Thanks anti for the very useful change, and to all posters this is an extremely interesting and educational thread.

    • This reply was modified 6 months, 1 week ago by ModdIt.
    #32576
    Member
    Avatarstevesr0

    Hi all,

    as an accidental installer of sid, I really appreciate this thread. I have printed anticapitalista’s OP so I remember to do that.

    My install is on one of my computers and I am only using that to learn more about a minimal install. So, if it goes belly up, that’s OK.

    stevesr0

    #32854
    Member
    Avatarstevesr0

    N.B. I may have solved this – after all the below, I opened a root window with spaceFM file manager and was able to delete the lock file. After this, I ran the double apt command (sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade” and it apparently completed normally (no files needed to be upgraded, updated or removed).

    HOWEVER, I am still puzzled by the apparent failure of sudo to be recognized as root. Perhaps the are you root message is generated by the lock; but, why isn’t that error message ALWAYS generated.

    The problem:
    I have never had a problem running “sudo apt update” or “sudo apt-get update”. However, When I tried out use anticapitalista’s suggested “sudo apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade” or “sudo apt update && apt full-upgrade”, I get the following two error messages:
    E: Could not open lock file /var/lib/dpkg/lock – open (13: Permission denied)
    E: Unable to lock the administration directory (/var/lib/dpkg/), are you root?

    $ sudo apt update && apt -s full-upgrade
    Hit:1 http://security.debian.org stretch/updates InRelease
    Hit:2 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian stretch-updates InRelease
    Hit:3 http://mirror.math.princeton.edu/pub/mxlinux/antix/stretch stretch InRelease
    Ign:4 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian stretch InRelease
    Hit:5 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian stretch Release
    Reading package lists… Done
    Building dependency tree
    Reading state information… Done
    All packages are up to date.
    NOTE: This is only a simulation!
    apt needs root privileges for real execution.
    Keep also in mind that locking is deactivated,
    so don’t depend on the relevance to the real current situation!
    Reading package lists… Done
    Building dependency tree
    Reading state information… Done
    Calculating upgrade… Done
    0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.

    I have not previously had a problem running sudo as a root substitute, and I didn’t find an answer via online search as to why the “&& sudo apt-get dist-upgrade” or “&& sudo apt full-upgrade” doesn’t work.
    Running the second command as a simulation works because the lock is deactivated.

    So I am not sure if this is a “lock” issue or a “root vs sudo” issue. The one thing I haven’t tried yet is to login as root and then try this… But if that worked it wouldn’t tell me why sudo doesn’t work.

    Even if that works, I am puzzled that I would have to use it for this combination of commands.

    thanks for any enlightenment.

    stevesr0

    #32860
    Forum Admin
    anticapitalistaanticapitalista

    Check the /etc/sudoers file has the correct permissions.

    Open rox as root, navigate to /etc/sudoers, right click on the file, Properties, make sure only owner and group are checked under Read.

    Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.

    antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

    #32865
    Member
    fungalnetfungalnet

    The issue is unrelated to which edition you are running, but this thread is testing/sid related.
    stretch is old-stable, isn’t this antix-17?

    A dirty unsecure trick is to add
    %sudo ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD: ALL
    to /etc/sudoers

    You still have to type sudo but you are never asked for password

    #32866
    Member
    capreacaprea

    Stevesr0, it will never work like this
    sudo apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade
    except in a root terminal

    In fact, it should read
    sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get dist-upgrade

    #32867
    Forum Admin
    anticapitalistaanticapitalista

    Well spotted caprea!

    Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.

    antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

    #32894
    Member
    Avatarstevesr0

    Hi all,

    1. I applied my “solution” (removing the lock file via a root window in SpaceFM) AFTER trying the correct command with TWO sudo elements (sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade) UNSUCCESSFULLY.
    Today, I ran it again after erroneously running without the second sudo and again got the message error. However, when I ran with the correct syntax immediately after this, it completed OK. I just checked and there is a new empty lock file (generated in the past 10 minutes). SO, I can’t tie this to blocking by a lock file.

    However, previously the correct syntaz didn’t work until after I deleted that lock file.

    2. Version. Yup, my problem is on a computer running 17. But I was following this because of the net install of Sid that I just did on another computer. I figured I should also try using this on the computer with the stable distro.

    Glad I am doing it right now <g>.

    3. re: sudoers. Yes, owner and group are the only checked off entries and only for read. I don’t wish to eliminate the need for password for sudo; I just want to continue to use my user password for this purpose, so I don’t need the NOPASSWD command in /etc/sudoers. I was wondering if there was some “nonstandard” permission (chattr or ACL or…?) involved. When I run lsattr for /etc/soduers, I get ————–e—- /etc/sudoers. Not sure what that means…

    Thanks to all for helpful, insightful comments.

    stevesr0

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 49 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.