sysvinit-utils vs sysvinit-utils-antix (Sid)

[Member stevesr0]

Hi all,

I am posting this because I have only seen one post about sysvinit-utils-antix and it is apparently in reference to antiX-21, not Sid. In my antiX-19 install, there is no sysvinit-utils-antix package in the repos, only a sysvinit-utils package.

In aptitude, I noticed that there are two packages (a) sysvinit-utils which is installed and (b) sysvinit-utils-antix whose install is blocked (pb) because of an inability to resolve dependencies. I don’t notice any problem because of this, but I would like to understand what difference exists between these two packages.

Obviously, if there is a reason to uninstall sysvinit-utils and replace it with sysvinit-utils-antix, I am happy to do so.

Since aptitude can’t resolve the dependencies involved, I will have to figure out how to do the switch while not terribly messing up my installed system.

Thanks for clarification/advice.

stevesr0

—————————-
UPDATE: I just saw this via DDG search:

@13 Debian APT changes (by anticapitalista on 2021-11-29 11:59:12 GMT from Greece)
I tried to build antiX (sid repos) via debootstrap and in a chroot and I am not able to remove sysvinit-utils for sysvinit-utils-antix (in order to use antiX’s implementation of runit).
It worked just fine before this latest ‘improvement’ to apt.
Anyone know how to ‘manually’ force the removal/replacement?

So, I guess until antix can do it, I am not likely to be successful <g>.

stevesr0

• This topic was modified 1 year, 4 months ago by stevesr0.

[Forum Admin anticapitalista]

Helpful

Up

0

::

sysvinit-utils-antix is used for runit versons.
sysvinit-utils is used for sysVinit versions.

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

antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

[Member stevesr0]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Hi anticapitalista,

Thanks for the clarification. Have you found a way to remove the unwanted sysvinit-utils package listing that I might use to remove sysvinit-utils-antix, so aptitude will work?

(I use sysvinit and have sysvinit-utils installed and Sid is working OK, except for aptitude.

Aptitude has sysvinit-utils-antix labelled as “pb” without a solution and it seems to block from doing anything.

Synaptic doesn’t show the same broken indicator for the sysvinit-utils-antix package and I was able to install some packages with it.

So, unless I can figure out how to fix aptitude, I will just use apt update, apt full-upgrade and synaptic.)

stevesr0

[Member stevesr0]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Correction to my previous post.

sysvinit-utils is installed, but not sysvinit-utils-antix. In aptitude, sysvinit-utils-antix is shown as a “pb” package, which means it is not installed but is broken. Aptitude states it cannot find a solution. This is currently blocking aptitude from making any changes in any package!

Since it isn’t installed, apt says there is nothing to remove.

A second package was listed as “pi” status, meaning it was to be installed but it wasn’t installable by aptitude because of the existence of the “pb” package.

Thankfully, apt had no problem installing this package and then aptitude just listed it as installed. However, aptitude is still frozen because of the “pb” package.

I ran an apt remove -s sysvinit-utils and it removed 39 packages including many fundamental to the OS.

So, I guess I will not be using aptitude to install or remove packages until this is fixed.

I am not sure that this has anything to do with the apt solver problem discussed in a separate thread here on the forum.

stevesr0

[Member ModdIt]

Helpful

Up

0

::

did you try to purge the broken package with dpkg,
then apt clean, apt update full upgrade

There is also an apt fix broken, worth a try. If I end up with an unsolvable mess,
I do sometimes (er too often) I just reinstall from my snapshot of working system.

[Forum Admin anticapitalista]

Helpful

Up

0

::

If you are using sysVinit, do not remove sysvinit-utils.

A second package was listed as “pi” status, meaning it was to be installed but it wasn’t installable by aptitude because of the existence of the “pb” package.

Which package?

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

antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

[Member stevesr0]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Hi Moddit and antcapitalista,

Thanks for responses.

The bottom line is apt seems to be working OK and the installed package (sysvinit-utils) is the one I SHOULD have. It is aptitude that has a problem – and that involves a package (sysvinit-utils-antix) that is not installed and I don’t want to install.

That package can’t be removed – because it isn’t installed (“nothing to remove”).

So, at this point, I just have to not use aptitude.

The package I installed with apt which was “pi” in aptitude is firmware-sof-signed. I believe it’s install by aptitude was blocked because aptitude is blocked from installing any package until the pb is resolved.

stevesr0

• This reply was modified 1 year, 4 months ago by stevesr0.

[Member stevesr0]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Hi all,

I solved the block of aptitude by a “pb” package.

When I put the proposed action for that file on HOLD, aptitude’s problem immediately vanished.

In retrospect, it is kind of basic, but I hadn’t found any posts on the internet suggesting this.

stevesr0

P.S. I can’t edit my OP to add solved. Really, this was not the same problem that anticapitalista had which didn’t involve aptitude.
This is really a problem in dealing with a how to unfreeze aptitude when a “pb” package has no solution.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 4 months ago by stevesr0.

[Author]

Posts