Debian Bug report logs - #217081
[apt-get] No status for virtual packages in "unmet dependencies" message

Reply or subscribe to this bug.

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: apt-get: incomprehensible error message in some failure scenarios

Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 11:06:22 -0500

Package: apt
Version: 0.5.14
Severity: normal

# apt-get -dy -o Debug::PkgProblemResolver=true dist-upgrade
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
You might want to run `apt-get -f install' to correct these.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
  xaw3dg-dev: Depends: libxaw6-dev but it is not installed or
                       libxaw-dev
E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.

"or libxaw-dev" what?

There is a problem with libxaw-dev (it is a pure virtual package these days),
but apt needs to say something more informative here.

-- Package-specific info:

-- apt-config dump --

APT "";
APT::Architecture "powerpc";
APT::Build-Essential "";
APT::Build-Essential:: "build-essential";
APT::Cache-Limit "16777216";
Dir "/";
Dir::State "var/lib/apt/";
Dir::State::lists "lists/";
Dir::State::cdroms "cdroms.list";
Dir::State::userstatus "status.user";
Dir::State::status "/var/lib/dpkg/status";
Dir::Cache "var/cache/apt/";
Dir::Cache::archives "archives/";
Dir::Cache::srcpkgcache "srcpkgcache.bin";
Dir::Cache::pkgcache "pkgcache.bin";
Dir::Etc "etc/apt/";
Dir::Etc::sourcelist "sources.list";
Dir::Etc::vendorlist "vendors.list";
Dir::Etc::vendorparts "vendors.list.d";
Dir::Etc::main "apt.conf";
Dir::Etc::parts "apt.conf.d";
Dir::Etc::preferences "preferences";
Dir::Bin "";
Dir::Bin::methods "/usr/lib/apt/methods";
Dir::Bin::dpkg "/usr/bin/dpkg";
DPkg "";
DPkg::Pre-Install-Pkgs "";
DPkg::Pre-Install-Pkgs:: "/usr/bin/apt-listchanges --apt || test $? -ne 10";
DPkg::Pre-Install-Pkgs:: "/usr/sbin/dpkg-preconfigure --apt || true";
DPkg::Tools "";
DPkg::Tools::Options "";
DPkg::Tools::Options::/usr/bin/apt-listchanges "";
DPkg::Tools::Options::/usr/bin/apt-listchanges::Version "2";

-- (no /etc/apt/preferences present) --

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: powerpc
Kernel: Linux redwald 2.4.21-powerpc #1 mar jui 8 19:36:37 CEST 2003 ppc
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8

Versions of packages apt depends on:
ii  libc6                      2.3.2-8       GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii  libgcc1                    1:3.3.2-0pre5 GCC support library
ii  libstdc++5                 1:3.3.2-0pre5 The GNU Standard C++ Library v3

-- no debconf information

Message #10 received at 217081@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org>

To: Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org>, 217081@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#217081: apt-get: incomprehensible error message in some failure scenarios

Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 12:43:09 -0400

retitle 217081 [apt-get] No status for virtual packages in "unmet dependencies" message
severity 217081 minor
thanks

On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 11:06:22AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:

> # apt-get -dy -o Debug::PkgProblemResolver=true dist-upgrade
> Reading Package Lists... Done
> Building Dependency Tree... Done
> You might want to run `apt-get -f install' to correct these.
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>   xaw3dg-dev: Depends: libxaw6-dev but it is not installed or
>                        libxaw-dev
> E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
> 
> "or libxaw-dev" what?
> 
> There is a problem with libxaw-dev (it is a pure virtual package these days),
> but apt needs to say something more informative here.

            /* Show a summary of the target package if possible. In the case
               of virtual packages we show nothing */    
            pkgCache::PkgIterator Targ = Start.TargetPkg();
            if (Targ->ProvidesList == 0)
[...]
                     if (Targ->ProvidesList == 0)
                        out << _("but it is not installable");
                     else
                        out << _("but it is a virtual package");

It looks like it used to say "but it is a virtual package" (which isn't much
better), and now intentionally remains silent in this case.  My guess is
that the possible breakage for virtual packages is not as simple to
ascertain or describe.

-- 
 - mdz

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.