apt-get / mach problems

Erik LaBianca erik at totalcirculation.com
Tue Mar 2 18:17:22 UTC 2004


> 
> [erik at mises SPECS]$ sudo apt-get install 'perl(Digest::SHA1)'
> 'perl(Digest::Nilsimsa)'
> Reading Package Lists... Done
> Building Dependency Tree... Done
> Selecting perl-Digest-SHA1 for 'perl(Digest::SHA1)'
> Package perl(Digest::Nilsimsa) is a virtual package provided by:
>   perl-Digest-Nilsimsa 0:0.06-0.fdr.4.1
> You should explicitly select one to install.
> E: Package perl(Digest::Nilsimsa) has no installation candidate
> 
>

Ok, I've found another (maybe easily fixed) bug on the apt-get side
things.

[root at mises root]# apt-get install perl-Digest-Nilsimsa
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
The following NEW packages will be installed:
   perl-Digest-Nilsimsa (0.06-0.fdr.4.1)
0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 removed and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 0B/26.1kB of archives.
After unpacking 47.8kB of additional disk space will be used.
Checking GPG signatures...
Committing changes...
Preparing...                ###########################################
[100%]
   1:perl-Digest-Nilsimsa   ###########################################
[100%]
Done.

[root at mises root]# apt-get install 'perl(Digest::Nilsimsa)'
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
Package perl(Digest::Nilsimsa) is a virtual package provided by:
  perl-Digest-Nilsimsa 0:0.06-0.fdr.4.1
You should explicitly select one to install.
E: Package perl(Digest::Nilsimsa) has no installation candidate

[root at mises root]# rpm -q --whatprovides 'perl(Digest::Nilsimsa)'
perl-Digest-Nilsimsa-0.06-0.fdr.4.1

What's happening here is that apt isn't checking rpm for a whatprovides
before it tries to do the install. This wouldn't be a problem, IF the
virtual provides resolution worked properly in all cases, but since it
doesn't, apt-get fails when asked to install bugged virtual provides,
even if there is something installed satisfying the dependency.

Not sure if this portion of the problem is really an apt bug or not,
it's easy enough to workaround by manually checking provides first.

--erik






More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list