Ubuntu installer problems
-
A user installed a package I created, didn't work. So, tried to install it manually; added Mono and libappstatusindicator from the terminal. Now the user is confronted with an error in the update-manager;
Some packages could not be installed
amberindicator:i386: Depends: debhelper (>=5) but 9.20120115ubuntu3 is installed
Depends: mono-runtime (>= 2.10.8.1-1) but 2.10.8.1-1ubuntu2.2 is installedThe suggested resolution would be to run sudo apt-get -f install according to the docs, but that sounds like 'try this and see if it works'. That's usually good enough since we can always reinstall the system if things go wrong. Can't do that with a users' PC. Who can tell me what I did wrong, and how to fix it? Does the error prevent other parts of the system from updating correctly?
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] They hate us for our freedom![^]
-
A user installed a package I created, didn't work. So, tried to install it manually; added Mono and libappstatusindicator from the terminal. Now the user is confronted with an error in the update-manager;
Some packages could not be installed
amberindicator:i386: Depends: debhelper (>=5) but 9.20120115ubuntu3 is installed
Depends: mono-runtime (>= 2.10.8.1-1) but 2.10.8.1-1ubuntu2.2 is installedThe suggested resolution would be to run sudo apt-get -f install according to the docs, but that sounds like 'try this and see if it works'. That's usually good enough since we can always reinstall the system if things go wrong. Can't do that with a users' PC. Who can tell me what I did wrong, and how to fix it? Does the error prevent other parts of the system from updating correctly?
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] They hate us for our freedom![^]
Ever get this resolved? ...sounds like version number was being reported or checked for in an incorrect manner...
-
Ever get this resolved? ...sounds like version number was being reported or checked for in an incorrect manner...
Albert Holguin wrote:
Ever get this resolved?
Not yet
Albert Holguin wrote:
...sounds like version number was being reported or checked for in an incorrect manner...
Always nice when an irrational error-description suddenly starts to sound logical. There's a difference in versions for the different platforms? Good enough starting point for a deeper Google, thanks :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] They hate us for our freedom![^]
-
Albert Holguin wrote:
Ever get this resolved?
Not yet
Albert Holguin wrote:
...sounds like version number was being reported or checked for in an incorrect manner...
Always nice when an irrational error-description suddenly starts to sound logical. There's a difference in versions for the different platforms? Good enough starting point for a deeper Google, thanks :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] They hate us for our freedom![^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
There's a difference in versions for the different platforms?
There could be... that's why a lot of packages in Linux provide source code instead of binaries, you could just rebuild for your platform. If you look at the error description, looks like some of those were built specifically for that version of Ubuntu... now, not sure how that got to the version number that the installer is looking at (not sure where this comes from specifically in Linux) but that seems to be the error source.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
There's a difference in versions for the different platforms?
There could be... that's why a lot of packages in Linux provide source code instead of binaries, you could just rebuild for your platform. If you look at the error description, looks like some of those were built specifically for that version of Ubuntu... now, not sure how that got to the version number that the installer is looking at (not sure where this comes from specifically in Linux) but that seems to be the error source.
Albert Holguin wrote:
There could be... that's why a lot of packages in Linux provide source code instead of binaries, you could just rebuild for your platform.
I have no problems invoking the compiler from code, nor in downloading the files; but mono needs to be there as a prerequisite, and also the CIL-bindings to existing Linux-libraries. (Well, at least for me :-\ )
Albert Holguin wrote:
If you look at the error description, looks like some of those were built specifically for that version of Ubuntu... now, not sure how that got to the version number that the installer is looking at (not sure where this comes from specifically in Linux) but that seems to be the error source.
My dependencies are generic, not bound to a platform;
Architecture: i386
Depends: debhelper (>= 5), libappindicator0.1-cil-dev (>=0.4.92-0), libappindicator0.1-cil (>=0.4.92-0), mono-runtime (>=2.10.8.1-1)At least it's a good starting point - thanks :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] They hate us for our freedom![^]