LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
Home Forums Tutorials Articles Register
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Linux Mint
User Name
Password
Linux Mint This forum is for the discussion of Linux Mint.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 12-23-2016, 03:14 PM   #16
snowday
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,667

Rep: Reputation: 1411Reputation: 1411Reputation: 1411Reputation: 1411Reputation: 1411Reputation: 1411Reputation: 1411Reputation: 1411Reputation: 1411Reputation: 1411

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I've been regularly keeping my Mint 17.x up-to-date, aren't I basically using 17.3 already?
 
Old 12-23-2016, 09:13 PM   #17
Ztcoracat
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Distribution: Slackware, MX 18
Posts: 9,484
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowpine View Post
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I've been regularly keeping my Mint 17.x up-to-date, aren't I basically using 17.3 already?
I'm not running Mint now but I'm pretty sure you are correct.
One way to find out is to run:

Code:
cat /etc/os-release
 
Old 01-04-2017, 02:37 PM   #18
wwm
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: May 2012
Location: Escondido, Ca.
Distribution: Mint
Posts: 17

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Synaptic info

Poking around a bit in Synaptic, I have been able to find that mint-meta-core is the broken package. It is, however, unable to fix it, at least through the gui. Interesting, I get this output from the suggested "find the current version" in the next post:
cat /etc/os-release
NAME="Ubuntu"
VERSION="14.04.5 LTS, Trusty Tahr"
ID=ubuntu
ID_LIKE=debian
PRETTY_NAME="Ubuntu 14.04.5 LTS"
VERSION_ID="14.04"
HOME_URL="http://www.ubuntu.com/"
SUPPORT_URL="http://help.ubuntu.com/"
BUG_REPORT_URL="http://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/"

Seems fishy! I thought it would say Mint something or other...
Could be it's time to do a new install, starting with 17.3? Ugh, I hate that!
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 01-04-2017, 02:41 PM   #19
hydrurga
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2008
Location: Pictland
Distribution: Linux Mint 21 MATE
Posts: 8,048
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925
Here's what my Mint 18.1 MATE system produces:

NAME="Linux Mint"
VERSION="18.1 (Serena)"
ID=linuxmint
ID_LIKE=ubuntu
PRETTY_NAME="Linux Mint 18.1"
VERSION_ID="18.1"
HOME_URL="http://www.linuxmint.com/"
SUPPORT_URL="http://forums.linuxmint.com/"
BUG_REPORT_URL="http://bugs.launchpad.net/linuxmint/"
VERSION_CODENAME=serena
UBUNTU_CODENAME=xenial
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 01-04-2017, 06:38 PM   #20
Ztcoracat
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Distribution: Slackware, MX 18
Posts: 9,484
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwm View Post
Poking around a bit in Synaptic, I have been able to find that mint-meta-core is the broken package. It is, however, unable to fix it, at least through the gui. Interesting, I get this output from the suggested "find the current version" in the next post:
cat /etc/os-release
NAME="Ubuntu"
VERSION="14.04.5 LTS, Trusty Tahr"
ID=ubuntu
ID_LIKE=debian
PRETTY_NAME="Ubuntu 14.04.5 LTS"
VERSION_ID="14.04"
HOME_URL="http://www.ubuntu.com/"
SUPPORT_URL="http://help.ubuntu.com/"
BUG_REPORT_URL="http://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/"

Seems fishy! I thought it would say Mint something or other...
Could be it's time to do a new install, starting with 17.3? Ugh, I hate that!
Doesn't look like Linux Mint 17.3 to me:-
 
Old 01-04-2017, 08:00 PM   #21
MIJ-VI
Member
 
Registered: May 2010
Posts: 65

Rep: Reputation: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwm View Post
Tried to upgrade from 17 to 17.3, failed with complaint of broken packages that need to be fixed. No mention of what to fix...So I tried apt update, and get the following error:
W: There is no public key available for the following key IDs:
1397BC53640DB551
What does this mean? What do I do about it? Is it even related to the original problem?
Thanks for any info/help with this, I'm not a Linux Guru, just a retired engineer!
Bill
Hi Bill.

You have two broad options:

1) Plough through Internet forums for help in repairing a crippled OS (I used to do so but not any more).

2) Set up your PC so that you can quickly do a clean re-install of Linux Mint without having to reformat its hard drive:

HOW I PARTITION A LINUX MINT HDD

How I partition a Linux Mint HDD (of greater than 2TB in capacity, in gparted choose 'gpt' as the partition map to be applied to the drive prior to partitioning it) in a manner which saves time later on.

Via gparted create four partitions on a GPT drive (CSM / Compatibility Support Module enabled in the motherboard's UEFI, no alleged *'Secure Boot'):

1) bios_grub = 1MB (the 1MB bios_grub partition is there to prevent older, pre-GPT-era disk repair utilities from attempting to 'repair' a GPT-era partition)

2) / = (1024MB x 40 = 40960MB or 40GB, ext4)

3) swap = 1GB more than the m/b's max. RAM capacity (1024MB x 33 = 33792MB or 33GB, the required swap partition size in the case of the Sabertooth 990FX R2.0) to ensure a functioning resume from suspend and hibernate.

4) /home (ext4) = the rest of the drive.

https://scontent.fyto1-1.fna.fbcdn.n...c5&oe=58E849FB

The above straight forward approach has not only supported resume from suspend on every AMD and the one Intel machine (an i5 750 / H57 Express, Gateway DX4831-07c) I've used it with, it also allows me to clean install an OS (after formatting the / partition and deleting the .name invisible preferences files and folders from the /home partition to keep them from mucking up a new OS) without having to delete /home (during an OS install mount /home as ext4 but don't format it) and then be forced to restore personal files from a backup disk for hours on end.

Further I always install an OS' GRUB on the same disk (or SSD) which that particular OS resides upon and then use the UEFI / BIOS' boot menu to boot between various HDDs or SSDs (I have an OS on every drive in my machine to ensure that I can always boot the PC if an OS install or the drive it's installed on fails). That way if one or more drives is or are removed from the machine the remaining drives will continue to be bootable and function normally.

What's more, drives prepared in the above manner can be transplanted into a different machine (which also supports GPT drive capacities) and still boot and work correctly. This works best when going from AMD to AMD or from Intel to Intel but AMD to Intel or vice versa nearly always works as well thanks to the Linux kernel having an abundance of firmware and drivers for various constituent chipsets of both hardware platforms.

*Secure Boot hacked
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Secure+Boo...ed&t=hu&ia=web

10 Aug 2016
*Bungling Microsoft singlehandedly proves that golden backdoor keys are a terrible idea • The Register
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/08...boot_ms16_100/

--

HOW I PARTITION A LINUX MINT SSD BOOT DRIVE

How I partition a Linux Mint SSD boot drive (of less than 2TB in capacity, in gparted choose 'msdos' as the partition map to be applied to the drive prior to partitioning it) in a manner which prevents premature wear.

1) / = (1024MB x 40 = 40960MB or 40GB, ext4)

2) /home (ext4) = the rest of the drive.

It is unnecessary to have a swap partition on an SSD boot drive as Linux Mint will automatically use the swap partition(s) on any connected HDD(s) partitioned in the manner described above. Further it is undesirable to have a swap partition on an SSD drive due to the premature wear it would cause in a specific area of the drive. The same holds true for Firefox's disk cache:

Step 1: In Firefox address bar type the about:config and confirm by pressing Enter on your keyboard

Step 2: Click I’ll be careful, I promise!

Step 3: In the Filter field, enter browser.cache

Step 4: Double click the option browser.cache.disk.enable

Step 5: Change it’s value to false

Step 6: Then check the option browser.cache.memory.enable is true. If this is not the case, double click it to change it

Step 7: Then click right mouse click in an empty space in the window and choose New -> Integer.

Step 8: Name the option browser.cache.memory.capacity. Click OK.

Step 9: Then enter 75000 (which is 75 MB) of memory assigned to the cache. Confirm with OK and restart Firefox to apply the change.

Step 10: Note that the cache is now stored in memory, it will be erased each time you restart your computer.


[Tutorial] How To Move Your Mozilla Firefox Cache Memory
https://thetechjournal.com/how-to/tu...e-memory.xhtml

Note: The instructions in the above article recommend a setting of 75000 or 75MB for Firefox's memory cache size. Firefox 50.0 has a default cache size of 350MB therefore a memory cache size of 350MB calculated at 1024 x 350 = 358400. However to ensure that Firefox won't run out of memory cache and crash when a large number of web pages are open, I would suggest a memory cache size equal to 350MB for every 8GB of motherboard RAM (1400MB calculated at 1024 x 1400 = 1433600 for 32GB of motherboard RAM). YMMV. (Note: Subsequent experience has taught me to also set the browser.cache.memory.max_entry_size to 1433600 as well in order to avoid the occasional crash in Firefox 50.1.0)

Related (and a further cause to scrutinize any other applications for the presence of a possible disk caching scheme):

November 10, 2016
Spotify SSD burnout: Streaming service rolls out update to fix excessive disk writes
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/spotify-rol...-users-1590917

Last edited by MIJ-VI; 01-06-2017 at 01:02 AM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 01-05-2017, 11:15 AM   #22
wwm
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: May 2012
Location: Escondido, Ca.
Distribution: Mint
Posts: 17

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Hi MIJ-VI,
That's an amazing amount of good info, it will take me a bit to digest it! My system is somewhat older/different from the one you describe, so it will take some thought to extract what applies or does not apply to my specific system. No UEFI in my current hw, for example. I already have a bootable OS on each of my two drives, and both drives are in my boot selection menu, so I understand the utility of that. Saved me once already...! I think that I'll clean out the second disk, which has an even older OS rev on it, and install a new 17.3 on that drive, at least until I'm forced to go 64 bit sometime, probably soon.
Thanks for the detailed instructions, I will be saving them.
Best Regards,
Bill
 
Old 01-05-2017, 03:11 PM   #23
Ztcoracat
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Distribution: Slackware, MX 18
Posts: 9,484
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176
Good luck on your fresh installation.
 
Old 01-06-2017, 12:59 AM   #24
MIJ-VI
Member
 
Registered: May 2010
Posts: 65

Rep: Reputation: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwm View Post
Hi MIJ-VI,
That's an amazing amount of good info, it will take me a bit to digest it! My system is somewhat older/different from the one you describe, so it will take some thought to extract what applies or does not apply to my specific system. No UEFI in my current hw, for example. I already have a bootable OS on each of my two drives, and both drives are in my boot selection menu, so I understand the utility of that. Saved me once already...! I think that I'll clean out the second disk, which has an even older OS rev on it, and install a new 17.3 on that drive, at least until I'm forced to go 64 bit sometime, probably soon.
Thanks for the detailed instructions, I will be saving them.
Best Regards,
Bill
Posting your system specs. (model numbers are good) in your forum signature will aid others in offering more concise suggestions.

For example. Now that I know you're running a 32-bit OS on an older, PC-BIOS-based PC, you'll likely be using HDDs that are less than 2TB in capacity. Thus:

Via gparted create three partitions on a drive with an msdos partition map (which each of your drives likely already has):

1) / = (1024MB x 40 = 40960MB or 40GB, ext4)

2) swap = 1GB more than your motherboard's max. RAM capacity (1024MB x ? + 1024MB = ? or ?GB, to ensure a functioning resume from suspend and hibernate.

3) /home (ext4) = the rest of the drive.

BTW. ext4 is the (stock) file system type you'll be using.

(Please ignore the bios_grub = 1MB partition in the following screen-shot and focus upon the remaining three partitions as a structural guide)
https://scontent.fyto1-1.fna.fbcdn.n...c5&oe=58E849FB

When it's time to install an OS on to a HDD with the above partition scheme, in the install utility choose the 'other' radio button at the bottom of the installation location options. You'll figure out what to do next.

A reminder: During the installation process be sure to install an OS' GRUB on to the same HDD which that particular OS resides upon and then after the OS(s) have been installed use the BIOS' boot menu (usually invoked by repeatedly tapping <F8> or <F12> just before or at the sound of the 'beep!') to boot between your two HDDs. That way if one hard drive is removed or fails the remaining drive will continue to be bootable and function normally.

Last edited by MIJ-VI; 01-06-2017 at 01:32 AM.
 
Old 01-06-2017, 11:57 PM   #25
TxLonghorn
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Austin Texas
Distribution: Mandrake 9.2
Posts: 702

Rep: Reputation: 231Reputation: 231Reputation: 231
MintUpdate > No public key for the following IDs: 1397BC53640DB551 [solved]
https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=223932
 
  


Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to fix "E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages."? chaitanyauk Linux - Newbie 2 07-14-2016 03:42 PM
[SOLVED] How to repair "broken packages" in Mint 11 Uaebuntu Linux - Software 3 06-04-2011 07:54 AM
how to install the "packages that have been held back" when doing "apt-get upgrade&qu zero79 Debian 5 06-27-2004 08:19 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Linux Mint

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:57 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration