DebianThis forum is for the discussion of Debian Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
For various reasons (yes, including my own foolishness) I failed to do an upgrade for several months. Today I executed apt-get update followed by apt-get upgrade with some disconcerting results.
The output (there was a large amount) ended with a number of warnings and errors whch were all of the following form:
Code:
insserv: warning: script 'S99runmbbservice' missing LSB tags and overrides
insserv: warning: script 'runmbbservice' missing LSB tags and overrides
insserv: There is a loop at service runmbbservice if started
insserv: There is a loop between service runmbbservice and mountnfs if started
insserv: loop involving service mountnfs at depth 10
insserv: loop involving service nfs-common at depth 9
insserv: Starting runmbbservice depends on minissdpd and therefore on system facility `$all' which can not be true!
--- the last message repeated 99 times ---
This occurs multple times and inbetween I get a lot of errors like this:
Code:
dpkg: error processing exim4-daemon-light (--configure):
dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of bsd-mailx:
bsd-mailx depends on default-mta | mail-transport-agent; however:
Package default-mta is not installed.
Package exim4-daemon-light which provides default-mta is not configured yet.
Package mail-transport-agent is not installed.
Package exim4-daemon-light which provides mail-transport-agent is not configured yet.
I tried a google search and found a lot of stuff which didn't seem entirely relevant. However, at least one suggested I should try fixing broken packages with Synaptic. I tried that, but Synaptic didn't seem to find any broken packages. I eventually tried repeating the upgrade with Synaptic and received, as expected, pretty much the same result.
In case anyone is wondering, my sources.list looks like this:
Code:
deb http://http.debian.net/debian wheezy main contrib non-free
deb http://security.debian.org/ wheezy/updates main contrib
deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian/ wheezy-updates main contrib
deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian wheezy-backports main contrib non-free
deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian wheezy-backports main contrib non-free
Would init scripts with just the header info and no other content help?
How can so many upgrade dependencies go awry at once?
I checked a couple of the init scripts mentioned in the error messages and came up with nothing obvious. That is to say the it's all very contradictory. For example runmbbservice is empty without any content whatever, whereas mountnfs.sh and nfs-common have the LSB standard header and bash script content (which I haven't tried to decipher, yet).
The debian information on How to LSBize an Init Script seems like a lot of work considering I haven't really done anything spectacular. The one thing I did do since the last upgrade was to trxy to install the "honest profiler"... a process which I did not complete successfully due to a number of dependency problems, which don't seem to be related to these issues. I'm still hoping to get it working some time in the future.
I'm running wheezy 7.7 with a 3.14 kernel.
Any clues as to what is going on would be greatly appreciated.
Last edited by achim_59; 12-29-2014 at 07:02 AM.
Reason: forgot link to debian site
I've never tried aptitude before, so this was a first for me. As suggesrted, I did not run as root. Here's the result:
Code:
achim@ascomtux:~$ aptitude -s full-upgrade
The following packages will be REMOVED:
gnuplot-nox{u} lib32asound2{u} lib32z1{u} libc6-i386{u} libgadu3{u} libjpeg62{u} libmatekeyring{u} libmatepolkit{u} libmatewnck{u}
libmatewnck-common{u} libmozjs24d{u} libnet-daemon-perl{u} libplrpc-perl{u} mate-calc{u} mate-core{u} python-gtksourceview2{u}
xulrunner-24.0{u}
The following packages will be upgraded:
gnuplot{b}
The following partially installed packages will be configured:
acpi-fakekey acpi-support at bsd-mailx clamav clamav-freshclam dbus dbus-x11 exim4 exim4-base exim4-daemon-light irqbalance
mate-power-manager mate-screensaver mysql-server mysql-server-5.5 ppp rsyslog unattended-upgrades
1 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 17 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 100 kB of archives. After unpacking 74.4 MB will be freed.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
gnuplot : Depends: gnuplot-qt (>= 4.6.5-5) but it is not going to be installed. or
gnuplot-x11 (>= 4.6.5-5) but it is not going to be installed. or
gnuplot-nox (>= 4.6.5-5) but it is not going to be installed.
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:
Remove the following packages:
1) gnuplot
I then indicated that the solution was acceptable just to see if I'd get more info but it basically told me the same thing with some minore differences:
Code:
Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] y
The following packages will be REMOVED:
gnuplot{a} lib32asound2{u} lib32z1{u} libc6-i386{u} libgadu3{u} libjpeg62{u} libmatekeyring{u} libmatepolkit{u} libmatewnck{u}
libmatewnck-common{u} libmozjs24d{u} libnet-daemon-perl{u} libplrpc-perl{u} mate-calc{u} mate-core{u} python-gtksourceview2{u}
xulrunner-24.0{u}
The following partially installed packages will be configured:
acpi-fakekey acpi-support at bsd-mailx clamav clamav-freshclam dbus dbus-x11 exim4 exim4-base exim4-daemon-light irqbalance
mate-power-manager mate-screensaver mysql-server mysql-server-5.5 ppp rsyslog unattended-upgrades
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 17 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 72.2 MB will be freed.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] y
Would download/install/remove packages.
Continue = y does nothing, of course. I'm a bit suspicious about the removal of those MATE packages, since that is the desktop that I use. Iguess I'll just haver to risk it ... unless somebody has another suggestion?
I'll leave it for a couple of hours and if no other suggestions come up, I'll run the command as root without the -s option. I'm also assuming nobody responds with a reply like "WAIT!!! DON'T DO IT!!" But I think that's unlikely.
The file /etc/apt/sources.list is shown in the original post. As for the directory /etc/apt/sources.list.d (blank lines inserted for readability):
Code:
achim@ascomtux:/etc/apt$ cd sources.list.d/
achim@ascomtux:/etc/apt/sources.list.d$ ls
google-chrome.list nodesource.list
achim@ascomtux:/etc/apt/sources.list.d$ cat nodesource.list
deb https://deb.nodesource.com/node wheezy main
deb-src https://deb.nodesource.com/node wheezy main
achim@ascomtux:/etc/apt/sources.list.d$ cat google-chrome.list
### THIS FILE IS AUTOMATICALLY CONFIGURED ###
# You may comment out this entry, but any other modifications may be lost.
deb http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main
The nodesource entry is not unexpected, since node.js is required for the profiler I mentioned above. The google-chrome entry is also not a complete surprise, since one of the projects I was working on uses GWT and originally required the chrome browser. However, I didn't add the sources.list.d file myself. Aparently the maven dependencies for the projectz or the chrome installation itself did that automagically.
Do you think one of those might be causing a conflict or something? The output for the aptitude command hasn't listed anything obvious that might affect either of these packages, so it should be safe... shouldn't it?
I hope somebody can make sense of that. I'm reading the Debian Admin Guide, but I've only just got to the bit about apt-get commands, so the cache policy stuff is a bit mysterious.
Last edited by achim_59; 12-29-2014 at 02:41 PM.
Reason: Cache policy info
root@ascomtux:/home/achim# aptitude -s safe-upgrade
Resolving dependencies...
The following NEW packages will be installed:
gnuplot-x11{a}
The following packages will be REMOVED:
gnuplot-nox{u} lib32asound2{u} lib32z1{u} libc6-i386{u} libgadu3{u} libjpeg62{u} libmatekeyring{u} libmatepolkit{u} libmatewnck{u}
libmatewnck-common{u} libmozjs24d{u} libnet-daemon-perl{u} libplrpc-perl{u} mate-calc{u} mate-core{u} python-gtksourceview2{u}
xulrunner-24.0{u}
The following partially installed packages will be configured:
acpi-fakekey acpi-support at bsd-mailx clamav clamav-freshclam dbus dbus-x11 exim4 exim4-base exim4-daemon-light irqbalance
mate-power-manager mate-screensaver mysql-server mysql-server-5.5 ppp rsyslog unattended-upgrades
0 packages upgraded, 1 newly installed, 17 to remove and 1 not upgraded.
Need to get 1,119 kB of archives. After unpacking 71.7 MB will be freed.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] y
Would download/install/remove packages.
The only real difference is that 1 package will not be upgraded and 1 package will be newly installed. I did the simulation as root this time, though that shouldn't be a problem... in fact I think it better reflects what really would happen.
In the end I have to take responsibility for the actions I take, so I'll give safe-upgrade a go and see what happens.
Well, that achieved precisely nothing, zilch, nada, nix. The result was much the same as at the start: a swathe of dpkg and insserv errors. Very disappointing but not entirely unexpected. For anyone interested, I've attached the output as a text file.
I'm obviously going to have to fix something, but since I don't recall doing anything particularly wrong (other than not doing regular updates), it's a bit hard to determine just what. I'll start by looking into those missing LSB things and see if I can't find a bit more information concerning the error messages.
BTW Head_on_a_Stick, the sources.list is really nothing special and was cobbled together with help from a few other people on this very forum. See this thread.
BTW Head_on_a_Stick, the sources.list is really nothing special and was cobbled together with help from a few other people on this very forum. See this thread.
From that link:
Quote:
Originally Posted by k3lt01
I personally wouldn't be mixing Ubuntu PPAs with Debian, it can be a disaster waiting to happen.
Sorry Head_on_a_Stick, but that's really not the problem. See the sources.list in the original post, above. There are no Ubuntu repositories left in it. They were removed as a result of the information I received in that other thread. I do try to follow the advice given.... mostly.
My web search has shown me a possible way to get to a solution. This bug report deals with the same issue for another package. Looking at the correspondence there, I suspect the problem comes from those profiler packages which were installed adhoc from maven repos. maven does not respect the dependencies on your machine (something I've noticed before). I need to sort out the dependencies and construct appropriate LSB headers for S99runmbbservice and runmbbservice. As soon as I've figured it out I'll be sure to post the answer here.
If anyone else has any ideas or can help me get a grasp of the LSB init scripts, please feel free to comment. Meantime I'll keep niggling away at the problem.
Sorry Head_on_a_Stick, but that's really not the problem.
Yes, that is exactly the problem.
You have installed foreign packages that don't conform to the specifications for the init that you are running.
This has compounded on you when it breaks the post-install configuration scripts of your upgrading packages, leaving a bunch of them in a half-installed state.
You also still have a foreign repo in your sources that seems to be complicating things (why are gnuplots dependencies "not going to be installed"? - they are available in wheezy-backports...)
Just a quick word about the -s switch in aptitude:
Quote:
I did the simulation as root this time, though that shouldn't be a problem... in fact I think it better reflects what really would happen.
This is not correct. They are identical. I did a simulation of aptitude -s full-upgrade; once as jdkaye and once as root. As you can see the results the same.
Code:
~$ aptitude -s full-upgrade
The following NEW packages will be installed:
coinor-libcbc3{a} coinor-libcgl1{a} coinor-libclp1{a} coinor-libcoinmp1{a}
coinor-libcoinutils3{a} coinor-libosi1{a} firebird2.5-common{a} firebird2.5-common-doc{a}
firebird2.5-server-common{a} libabw-0.1-1{a} libboost-date-time1.55.0{a} libcdr-0.1-1{a}
libcmis-0.4-4{a} libe-book-0.1-1{a} libeot0{a} libetonyek-0.1-1{a} libfbclient2{a}
libfbembed2.5{a} libfreehand-0.1-1{a} libgltf-0.0-0{a} libmspub-0.1-1{a} libmwaw-0.3-3{a}
libodfgen-0.1-1{a} liborcus-0.8-0{a} libreoffice-avmedia-backend-gstreamer{a}
libreoffice-base-drivers{a} libreoffice-sdbc-firebird{a} libreoffice-sdbc-hsqldb{a}
libvisio-0.1-1{a} libwps-0.3-3{a}
The following packages will be upgraded:
libjpeg62-turbo{b} libjpeg62-turbo:i386{b} libreoffice-base libreoffice-base-core
libreoffice-calc libreoffice-common libreoffice-core libreoffice-draw libreoffice-impress
libreoffice-kde libreoffice-math libreoffice-style-galaxy libreoffice-style-oxygen
libreoffice-writer python3-uno task-british-desktop task-british-kde-desktop task-desktop
task-english task-kde-desktop task-print-server task-ssh-server task-web-server tasksel
tasksel-data uno-libs3 ure
27 packages upgraded, 30 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded.
Need to get 90.4 MB of archives. After unpacking 50.6 MB will be used.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libreoffice : Depends: libreoffice-core (= 1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1) but 1:4.3.3-2 is to be installed.
task-database-server : Depends: tasksel (= 3.21) but 3.29 is to be installed.
task-mail-server : Depends: tasksel (= 3.21) but 3.29 is to be installed.
task-dns-server : Depends: tasksel (= 3.21) but 3.29 is to be installed.
task-file-server : Depends: tasksel (= 3.21) but 3.29 is to be installed.
libjpeg62-turbo : Conflicts: libjpeg62 but 1:1.3.1-8 is installed.
libjpeg62-turbo:i386 : Conflicts: libjpeg62 but 1:1.3.1-8 is installed.
libjpeg62 : Depends: libjpeg62-turbo (= 1:1.3.1-8) but 1:1.3.1-11 is to be installed.
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:
Keep the following packages at their current version:
1) libjpeg62-turbo [1:1.3.1-8 (now)]
2) libjpeg62-turbo:i386 [1:1.3.1-8 (now)]
3) libreoffice-base [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
4) libreoffice-base-core [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
5) libreoffice-base-drivers [Not Installed]
6) libreoffice-calc [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
7) libreoffice-common [1:4.1.6~rc2-1 (now)]
8) libreoffice-core [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
9) libreoffice-draw [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
10) libreoffice-impress [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
11) libreoffice-kde [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
12) libreoffice-math [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
13) libreoffice-style-galaxy [1:4.1.6~rc2-1 (now)]
14) libreoffice-style-oxygen [1:4.1.6~rc2-1 (now)]
15) libreoffice-writer [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
16) python3-uno [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
17) task-british-desktop [3.21 (now)]
18) task-british-kde-desktop [3.21 (now)]
19) task-desktop [3.21 (now)]
20) task-english [3.21 (now)]
21) task-kde-desktop [3.21 (now)]
22) task-print-server [3.21 (now)]
23) task-ssh-server [3.21 (now)]
24) task-web-server [3.21 (now)]
25) tasksel [3.21 (now)]
26) tasksel-data [3.21 (now)]
27) uno-libs3 [4.2.6-1 (now)]
28) ure [4.2.6-1 (now)]
Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]
Now for root:
Code:
root@AttilaII:/home/jdkaye# aptitude -s full-upgrade
The following NEW packages will be installed:
coinor-libcbc3{a} coinor-libcgl1{a} coinor-libclp1{a} coinor-libcoinmp1{a}
coinor-libcoinutils3{a} coinor-libosi1{a} firebird2.5-common{a} firebird2.5-common-doc{a}
firebird2.5-server-common{a} libabw-0.1-1{a} libboost-date-time1.55.0{a} libcdr-0.1-1{a}
libcmis-0.4-4{a} libe-book-0.1-1{a} libeot0{a} libetonyek-0.1-1{a} libfbclient2{a}
libfbembed2.5{a} libfreehand-0.1-1{a} libgltf-0.0-0{a} libmspub-0.1-1{a} libmwaw-0.3-3{a}
libodfgen-0.1-1{a} liborcus-0.8-0{a} libreoffice-avmedia-backend-gstreamer{a}
libreoffice-base-drivers{a} libreoffice-sdbc-firebird{a} libreoffice-sdbc-hsqldb{a}
libvisio-0.1-1{a} libwps-0.3-3{a}
The following packages will be upgraded:
libjpeg62-turbo{b} libjpeg62-turbo:i386{b} libreoffice-base libreoffice-base-core
libreoffice-calc libreoffice-common libreoffice-core libreoffice-draw libreoffice-impress
libreoffice-kde libreoffice-math libreoffice-style-galaxy libreoffice-style-oxygen
libreoffice-writer python3-uno task-british-desktop task-british-kde-desktop task-desktop
task-english task-kde-desktop task-print-server task-ssh-server task-web-server tasksel
tasksel-data uno-libs3 ure
27 packages upgraded, 30 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded.
Need to get 90.4 MB of archives. After unpacking 50.6 MB will be used.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libreoffice : Depends: libreoffice-core (= 1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1) but 1:4.3.3-2 is to be installed.
task-database-server : Depends: tasksel (= 3.21) but 3.29 is to be installed.
task-mail-server : Depends: tasksel (= 3.21) but 3.29 is to be installed.
task-dns-server : Depends: tasksel (= 3.21) but 3.29 is to be installed.
task-file-server : Depends: tasksel (= 3.21) but 3.29 is to be installed.
libjpeg62-turbo : Conflicts: libjpeg62 but 1:1.3.1-8 is installed.
libjpeg62-turbo:i386 : Conflicts: libjpeg62 but 1:1.3.1-8 is installed.
libjpeg62 : Depends: libjpeg62-turbo (= 1:1.3.1-8) but 1:1.3.1-11 is to be installed.
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:
Keep the following packages at their current version:
1) libjpeg62-turbo [1:1.3.1-8 (now)]
2) libjpeg62-turbo:i386 [1:1.3.1-8 (now)]
3) libreoffice-base [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
4) libreoffice-base-core [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
5) libreoffice-base-drivers [Not Installed]
6) libreoffice-calc [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
7) libreoffice-common [1:4.1.6~rc2-1 (now)]
8) libreoffice-core [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
9) libreoffice-draw [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
10) libreoffice-impress [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
11) libreoffice-kde [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
12) libreoffice-math [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
13) libreoffice-style-galaxy [1:4.1.6~rc2-1 (now)]
14) libreoffice-style-oxygen [1:4.1.6~rc2-1 (now)]
15) libreoffice-writer [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
16) python3-uno [1:4.1.6~rc2-1+b1 (now)]
17) task-british-desktop [3.21 (now)]
18) task-british-kde-desktop [3.21 (now)]
19) task-desktop [3.21 (now)]
20) task-english [3.21 (now)]
21) task-kde-desktop [3.21 (now)]
22) task-print-server [3.21 (now)]
23) task-ssh-server [3.21 (now)]
24) task-web-server [3.21 (now)]
25) tasksel [3.21 (now)]
26) tasksel-data [3.21 (now)]
27) uno-libs3 [4.2.6-1 (now)]
28) ure [4.2.6-1 (now)]
Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]
Yeah, OK. running the simulation as root gives the same result. I was assuming from earlier admonitions to "not run as root" that there might be a difference. Unfortunately, knowing that there isn't, doesn't help me much at this point.
The packages installed previously from Ubuntu were cleaned up... quite some time ago. I haven't had problems from that quarter, since. That is why I marked that other thread as solved. The google-chrome stuff in /etc/apt/sources.list.d has been there for a while, too (almost a year). It was installed with a .deb from Google so I don't think that's where the problem is coming from either. Otherwise no Debian user would be able to use the chrome browser, or does chrome come with a standard release or backport these days? Must look into that.
My suspicion is that the incomplete installation of the Richard Warburton's honest profiler is causing the problem. That was done using a series of make scripts which indicated unsatisfied dependencies requiring repeated rebuilds ... until I ran out of time and just dropped the whole thing. Guess I shouldn't have left it in that state.
Two things I want to try:
Create LSB init scripts for runmbbservice and S99runmbbservice, which are empty or non-existent at present.
Remove all the profiler stuff. The more I think about it, the more this seems like a necessary step. This would include removing nodesource.list.
I haven't done either of these, because of New Year (busy celebrating, y'know). I'll get onto it and post the results.
A further thought: using external repositories is pretty much essential if you're going to use applications that are not part of the standard release. That there might be init script compatibility problems is something that the bug report mentioned earlier makes relatively clear. It also contains clues on how to deal with it as does the documentation on the Linux Standard Base Core Specification 3.1. It'll take me a while to get through that all, though.
Last edited by achim_59; 01-01-2015 at 09:23 AM.
Reason: spelling
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
Debian wheezy upgrade errors for insserv
Thanks for the response
No headway yet
