Huutajat, smellies, Debian
Mar. 8th, 2004 01:46 pm1. Huutajat. I went to see Screaming Men at the Fimhouse last week. It was very good. I must find some Mieskuoro Huutajat at some point. The film's recommended if it comes near you, although it doesn't look like it's got a significant number os showings pending.
2. Smellies. I have a bag of Assorted Fragrant Toiletries (Masculine) that I've been refusing to touch with my bargepole for a good while now. Anyone fancy them?
3. Debian. A problem. The libc6 postinstall script attempts to restart services, but fails (reporting error 139), leaving libc6 officially half-configured. Now, they all have been restarted several times over recent months when the machine was rebooted, and I'm happy that the system's in a good solid state. There's been no odd behaviour. Everything seems to run fine.
Except apt and dpkg. I can't do anything with them because they barf on libc6 not being properly installed.
The installed version of libc6 is 2.2.5-11.5, and the config version is 2.1.3-19, if that's any help. There are two or three known outstanding bugs which look similar, but none of them definitely look identical. Does anyone a) recognise this, b) know how to fix or work around it, or c) know how to lie to dpkg about the state of the package?
2. Smellies. I have a bag of Assorted Fragrant Toiletries (Masculine) that I've been refusing to touch with my bargepole for a good while now. Anyone fancy them?
3. Debian. A problem. The libc6 postinstall script attempts to restart services, but fails (reporting error 139), leaving libc6 officially half-configured. Now, they all have been restarted several times over recent months when the machine was rebooted, and I'm happy that the system's in a good solid state. There's been no odd behaviour. Everything seems to run fine.
Except apt and dpkg. I can't do anything with them because they barf on libc6 not being properly installed.
The installed version of libc6 is 2.2.5-11.5, and the config version is 2.1.3-19, if that's any help. There are two or three known outstanding bugs which look similar, but none of them definitely look identical. Does anyone a) recognise this, b) know how to fix or work around it, or c) know how to lie to dpkg about the state of the package?
no subject
Date: 2004-03-08 05:55 am (UTC)The installation state is kept in /var/lib/dpkg/available - that's a fun one to mess with ;)
no subject
Date: 2004-03-08 06:03 am (UTC)I may try this, but beat in mind that as an honest biologist my programming skills would be flattered by the word "rudimentary".
The installation state is kept in /var/lib/dpkg/available - that's a fun one to mess with ;)
Tried that. It saw right through me. The moment I changed anything, it refused to touch it.
no subject
Date: 2004-03-08 06:06 am (UTC)There is also the other file /var/lib/dpkg/status which you can mess with. (For appropriate values of mess)
no subject
Date: 2004-03-08 06:13 am (UTC)Thanks.
no subject
Date: 2004-03-08 06:27 am (UTC)Thanks. I still have a horrible feeling it's going to explode in my face, but it's definitely progress.
no subject
Date: 2004-03-08 05:57 am (UTC)You can download a couple of tracks at their website: http://www.huutajat.org/
'Star Spangled Banner' is a work of genius.
no subject
Date: 2004-03-08 05:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-03-08 06:12 am (UTC)Great, you understand, but strange.
no subject
Date: 2004-03-08 10:23 am (UTC)Swap them for a pint sometime?
no subject
Date: 2004-03-08 10:37 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-03-08 10:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-03-08 10:57 am (UTC)