*** Please type your report below this line ***
As of 19 January 2006 metacity(=1:2.16.2-1) is not installable due to
broken dependancies (depends on metacity-common 1:2.16.2-1 but only
1:2.16.3-1 is installable)
I know that gnome 2.16 isn't fully packaged but this seems more like
an human error to me.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 4.0
APT prefers experimental
APT policy: (990, 'experimental'), (800, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-nanomad
Locale: LANG=it_IT.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=it_IT.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Versions of packages metacity depends on:
ii libatk1.0-0 1.12.4-1 The ATK accessibility toolkit
ii libc6 2.5-0exp3 GNU C Library: Shared libraries
ii libgconf2-4 2.16.0-3 GNOME configuration database syste
ii libglib2.0-0 2.12.9-1 The GLib library of C routines
ii libgtk2.0-0 2.10.7-1 The GTK+ graphical user interface
ii libice6 1:1.0.1-2 X11 Inter-Client Exchange library
ii libmetacity0 1:2.14.5-2 library of lightweight GTK2 based
ii libpango1.0-0 1.14.8-5 Layout and rendering of internatio
ii libsm6 1:1.0.1-3 X11 Session Management library
ii libstartup-notification0 0.8-2 library for program launch feedbac
ii libx11-6 2:1.1-2 X11 client-side library
ii libxcursor1 1.1.7-4 X cursor management library
ii libxext6 1:1.0.1-2 X11 miscellaneous extension librar
ii libxinerama1 1:1.0.1-4.1 X11 Xinerama extension library
ii libxrandr2 2:188.8.131.52-5 X11 RandR extension library
ii libxrender1 1:0.9.1-3 X Rendering Extension client libra
ii metacity-common 1:2.14.5-2 Shared files of lightweight GTK2 b
metacity recommends no packages.
-- no debconf information
Ubuntu "Edgy" on Desktop PC (P4 1.4Ghz)
Debian "Unstable+Expermental" on Laptop (Centrino 2Ghz)
Il giorno ven, 19/01/2007 alle 15.59 +0100, Loïc Minier ha scritto:
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2007, Nanomad wrote:
> > As of 19 January 2006 metacity(=1:2.16.2-1) is not installable due to
> > broken dependancies (depends on metacity-common 1:2.16.2-1 but only
> > 1:2.16.3-1 is installable)
> > I know that gnome 2.16 isn't fully packaged but this seems more like
> > an human error to me.
> This is not a human error, but plenty of builds are missing from
> experimental due to:
> - lack of i386 buildd
Thanks for the timing, Loïc, as usual !
By the way, this is currently quite a common situation, is there any
solution - will there be one any time soon ?
On Fri, Jan 19, 2007, Marco Cabizza wrote:
> By the way, this is currently quite a common situation, is there any
> solution - will there be one any time soon ?
The only current way for me to solve this is to build the missing
packages. I think we should try to upload for i386 in experimental (at
least there's an amd64 buildd).
I think it's a waste of time to build the GNOME 2.16 packages by hand
except by interested parties. If a DD happens to he interested and
rebuilds some stuff, he's welcome to upload it of course. But it's
really a waste of DD resources to build GNOME 2.16 manually.
The proper long term solution is to fix sbuild; I wish I had time to
work on this.