/dev/chat

Celada

06:55

@Anthon Re: "You don't have to post here, you have to earn 50 reputation. Now several users and probably a moderator need to clean up after you.": is that a fair comment? What is the user suposed to do? Wait until they get 50 points then remember to come back and edit everything they couldn't edit before? I thought the link rot corrections would be appreciated.

Anthon

08:09

@Celada Yes it is, it is explaining the system to new users. If you don't have money you can go and work to earn something, or you can steal, it is all depending on what is appropriate behaviour in the society you are in.

BTW your "moderation" by taking the content of an answer that should have been a comment and making it into an edit to another answer is IMO also inappropriate. But the answer is flagged and we will see what the sites-moderators will do.

Anthon

08:28

@Celada and I should have pointed out immediately to the poster of that comment that a direct (reviewed) edit of the post would have been more appropriate than an essential link only answer.

Celada

That last observation, I agree with. A reviewed edit would have been perfect.

terdon

12:25

@Anthon Why? That's exactly what the poster should have done in the first place and what I would have done myself. Correcting a broken link is fine. Had @Celada not done so, I would have edited and changed them myself. Useful info should not remain in the comments.

Anthon

12:56

@terdon the poster of that "answer" should have made that edit him/herself, AFAIK you can do so even with 1 rep, but it has been a while.

Faheem Mitha

13:21

@Anthon why? seems reasonable to me.

Heh, I didn't see @terdon's response or your reply. I should try reading ahead.

Regardless, I don't think waiting for a poster to fix such things is necessary. it's quite likely that he/she would not do so. And a broken link is not a big deal. I fix such things all the time.

When I can, that is.

Braiam

as long as you don't start adding WP links to each term, I don't think that correcting/adding the relevant documentation link is bad

Faheem Mitha

13:35

Also, if you don't do such a thing right away, you are likely to forget all about it. And if the poster doesn't fix it, it stays broken.

And if the poster doesn't like your choice of link, he/she can always fix it later.

terdon

14:10

@Anthon Oh yes, absolutely. Since they didn't, however, having someone else edit it into the other answer seems like the best approach. You seemed to be suggesting that Celada acted wrongly with their edit.

Anthon

@terdon I was initially annoyed by the thanks (although abusing the system). These answerers always have some "valid" reason to misuse it, without looking for a) why would I need 50 rep and b) is there some other way.

I should have started with pointing out the correct way of doing this to the poster first, but this "Oh the stupid system doesn't allow me what to do" sometimes gets on my nervs

terdon

@Anthon Yeah, I know that feeling :)

Anthon

And the poster had been on SO for a year, as well as Celeda should have know better IMO.

MichaelJohn

Hi - its MichaelJohn... How do I ping Faheem Mitha...

Anthon

14:33

@MichaelJohn you put the @sign and start typing the name he will be notified that way of you trying to reach him

MichaelJohn

@FaheemMitha in the chat room...

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn hi. back now. was at dinner.

MichaelJohn

@FaheemMitha - we all have to eat... What info can I post up for you...

Faheem Mitha

Ok, let me pull up the question.

So, have you done any local installs on that machine? Or anything else out of the ordinary?

E: Could not get lock /var/cache/apt/archives/lock - open (11: Resource temporarily unavailable)
E: Unable to lock directory /var/cache/apt/archives/

This usually suggests that an apt process got stuck. Ok, make sure you are not intentionally running apt or dpkg, then do

ps aux | grep apt

and

ps aux | grep dpkg

MichaelJohn

No - the main problem was that /dev//sda2 filled up and have had issues since...

Faheem Mitha

14:42

if there are any apt processes listed that are stuck, you can try killing them.

@MichaelJohn you don't say anything about that in your question.

but first try what i said above.

MichaelJohn

Both come back with the grep line only...

Faheem Mitha

ok

so what is the outpuf of df -h?

MichaelJohn

Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda2 28G 4.5G 22G 18% /
udev 1.8G 4.0K 1.8G 1% /dev
tmpfs 356M 1004K 355M 1% /run
none 5.0M 0 5.0M 0% /run/lock
none 1.8G 76K 1.8G 1% /run/shm
/dev/sda3 661G 110G 519G 18% /home

The problem was caused by mysql - the apt-get install put the data in /root. I have now moved it to /home but currently can fire it up...

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn Ok, so are you still seeing the problems in your question?

What is the output of apt-get -f install?

MichaelJohn

15:00

First part is:-

# apt-get -f install
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Correcting dependencies... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
libglib2.0-0 python-appindicator python-uno
The following packages will be upgraded:
libglib2.0-0 python-appindicator python-uno
3 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 633 not upgraded.
50 not fully installed or removed.
Need to get 0 B/1,590 kB of archives.
After this operation, 28.7 kB of additional disk space will be used.

Shall I hit Y?

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn yes

633 not upgraded. That seems wrong. What is in your sources?

MichaelJohn

Was a recent install of the OS and everything was upgraded subsequenlty. No sure where to find sources as either ran Synaptic Package Manager or apt-get command line...

Do you want to continue [Y/n]? Y
E: Internal Error, No file name for libssl1.0.0

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn usually /etc/apt/sources.list.

@MichaelJohn That's not good. Never seen that before

apt-cache policy libssl1.0.0, please

MichaelJohn

# apt-cache policy libssl1.0.0
libssl1.0.0:
Installed: 1.0.1-4ubuntu5.21
Candidate: 1.0.1-4ubuntu5.21
Version table:
*** 1.0.1-4ubuntu5.21 0
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise-updates/main amd64 Packages
500 http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise-security/main amd64 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
1.0.1-4ubuntu3 0
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise/main amd64 Packages

Faheem Mitha

15:19

Ok, try apt-get -s purge libssl1.0.0

the -s sets it to testing mode. so it does not actually do anything.

And post your sources.list.

MichaelJohn

# more sources.list
deb http://packages.linuxmint.com/ maya upstream import main
deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise main restricted universe multivers
e
deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise-updates main restricted universe m
ultiverse
deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise-security main restricted universe
multiverse
deb http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu/ precise partner
# deb http://packages.medibuntu.org/ precise free non-free

# deb http://archive.getdeb.net/ubuntu precise-getdeb apps

Faheem Mitha

Possibly dumb question, but why do you have Ubuntu sources mixed in with Mint ones?

If you are running Mint?

MichaelJohn

Yes running Mint 13 (based on Ubuntu 12.04)...

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn Is mixing sources like that officially supported?

Try the apt-get -s purge libssl1.0.0 command.

MichaelJohn

Think it is as just checked on this machine, which is 32-bit) and the same...

Faheem Mitha

15:38

@MichaelJohn think it is supported? It is customary to refer to the documentation. Did you add any of these source manually, and if so, which ones?

Oh, and output of dpkg -l libssl1.0.0, please

MichaelJohn

No I have not edited the sources

Other command does not look healthy:-

# apt-get -s purge libssl1.0.0
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these:
The following packages have unmet dependencies.
crda : Depends: libssl1.0.0 (>= 1.0.0) but it is not going to be installed
gstreamer0.10-plugins-bad : Depends: libssl1.0.0 (>= 1.0.0) but it is not going to be installed
iputils-ping : Depends: libssl1.0.0 (>= 1.0.0) but it is not going to be installed

Braiam

@MichaelJohn do this, sudo apt-get --reinstall install libssl1.0.0

Faheem Mitha

dpkg -l libssl1.0.0

MichaelJohn

# apt-get --reinstall install libssl1.0.0
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these:
The following packages have unmet dependencies.
libglib2.0-bin : Depends: libglib2.0-0 (= 2.32.4-0ubuntu1) but 2.32.1-0ubuntu2 is to be installed
python-appindicator : Depends: libappindicator1 (= 0.4.92-0ubuntu1) but 0.4.92-0ubuntu1.1 is to be installed
python-uno : Depends: libreoffice-core (= 1:3.5.2-2ubuntu1) but 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7 is to be installed

Faheem Mitha

dpkg -l libssl1.0.0 (third time)

MichaelJohn

15:48

# apt-get --reinstall install libssl1.0.0
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these:
The following packages have unmet dependencies.
libglib2.0-bin : Depends: libglib2.0-0 (= 2.32.4-0ubuntu1) but 2.32.1-0ubuntu2 is to be installed
python-appindicator : Depends: libappindicator1 (= 0.4.92-0ubuntu1) but 0.4.92-0ubuntu1.1 is to be installed
python-uno : Depends: libreoffice-core (= 1:3.5.2-2ubuntu1) but 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7 is to be installed

Faheem Mitha

ah, that's definitely a problem

apt-cache policy libreoffice-core, please

also dpkg -l libreoffice-core

MichaelJohn

# apt-cache policy libreoffice-core
libreoffice-core:
Installed: 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7
Candidate: 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7
Version table:
*** 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7 0
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise-updates/main amd64 Packages
500 http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise-security/main amd64 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
1:3.5.2-2ubuntu1 0
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise/main amd64 Packages

Faheem Mitha

dpkg -l libreoffice-core

MichaelJohn

# apt-cache policy libreoffice-core
libreoffice-core:
Installed: 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7
Candidate: 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7
Version table:
*** 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7 0
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise-updates/main amd64 Packages
500 http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise-security/main amd64 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
1:3.5.2-2ubuntu1 0
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise/main amd64 Packages
etb-HP-255-G1-Notebook-PC apt # dpkg -l libreoffice-core
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold

Faheem Mitha

Please don't repaste the same thing twice, it just creates clutter

what does apt-get install python-uno give?

Braiam

15:56

@MichaelJohn just post sudo apt-get check and sudo dpkg -C in a question

Faheem Mitha

yes, dpkg -C is reasonable

MichaelJohn

Sorry that was a copy/paste error...

# apt-get install python-uno
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these:
The following packages have unmet dependencies.
libglib2.0-bin : Depends: libglib2.0-0 (= 2.32.4-0ubuntu1) but 2.32.1-0ubuntu2 is to be installed
python-appindicator : Depends: libappindicator1 (= 0.4.92-0ubuntu1) but 0.4.92-0ubuntu1.1 is to be installed
E: Unmet dependencies. Try 'apt-get -f install' with no packages (or specify a solution).

Faheem Mitha

Ok, apt-get install libglib2.0-bin

Also apt-cache policy libglib2.0-bin libglib2.0-0 , dpkg -l libglib2.0-bin libglib2.0-0

MichaelJohn

@Braiam Do mean as question in forum. This appear to bre issue:-

# sudo dpkg -C
The following packages are in a mess due to serious problems during
installation. They must be reinstalled for them (and any packages
that depend on them) to function properly:
python-appindicator Python bindings for libappindicator
python-apt Python interface to libapt-pkg
python-uno Python-UNO bridge

# apt-get install libglib2.0-bin
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
libglib2.0-bin is already the newest version.
You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these:
The following packages have unmet dependencies.
libglib2.0-bin : Depends: libglib2.0-0 (= 2.32.4-0ubuntu1) but 2.32.1-0ubuntu2 is to be installed
python-appindicator : Depends: libappindicator1 (= 0.4.92-0ubuntu1) but 0.4.92-0ubuntu1.1 is to be installed
python-uno : Depends: libreoffice-core (= 1:3.5.2-2ubuntu1) but 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7 is to be installed

Faheem Mitha

dpkg -l python-appindicator python-apt python-uno

apt-cache policy libglib2.0-0

MichaelJohn

16:11

# dpkg -l libglib2.0-bin libglib2.0-0
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version Description
+++-==============-==============-============================================
ii libglib2.0-0 2.32.1-0ubuntu GLib library of C routines
iU libglib2.0-bin 2.32.4-0ubuntu Programs for the GLib library

Braiam

@MichaelJohn sudo apt-get --reinstall install python-appindicator python-apt python-uno

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn there appears to be a mis-match here.

One sec.

These versions should be the same:

root@orwell:/home/faheem# dpkg -l libglib2.0-bin libglib2.0-0
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version Architecture Description
+++-================================-=====================-=====================-=====================================================================
ii libglib2.0-0:amd64 2.33.12+really2.32.4- amd64 GLib library of C routines

Let's focus on this for a moment.

apt-cache policy libglib2.0-bin libglib2.0-0

MichaelJohn

# dpkg -l python-appindicator python-apt python-uno
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version Description
+++-==============-==============-============================================
iFR python-appindi 0.4.92-0ubuntu Python bindings for libappindicator
iFR python-apt 0.8.3ubuntu7 Python interface to libapt-pkg
iFR python-uno 1:3.5.2-2ubunt Python-UNO bridge

Anthon

Have I always not been scrolling down enough or is the link to [Meta Reviews] on the review overview page new.

Faheem Mitha

Let's forget about the Python packages for the moment.

apt-cache policy libglib2.0-bin libglib2.0-0

If the lower level packages are a mess, it is going to affect things on top.

You need to first fix the lower level ones. First need to understand what is happening.

MichaelJohn

16:15

# apt-cache policy libglib2.0-0
libglib2.0-0:
Installed: 2.32.1-0ubuntu2
Candidate: 2.32.4-0ubuntu1
Version table:
2.32.4-0ubuntu1 0
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise-updates/main amd64 Packages
*** 2.32.1-0ubuntu2 0
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise/main amd64 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

Faheem Mitha

apt-cache policy libglib2.0-bin libglib2.0-0 please

MichaelJohn

# apt-cache policy libglib2.0-bin libglib2.0-0
libglib2.0-bin:
Installed: 2.32.4-0ubuntu1
Candidate: 2.32.4-0ubuntu1
Version table:
*** 2.32.4-0ubuntu1 0
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise-updates/main amd64 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
2.32.1-0ubuntu2 0
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise/main amd64 Packages
libglib2.0-0:
Installed: 2.32.1-0ubuntu2
Candidate: 2.32.4-0ubuntu1
Version table:
2.32.4-0ubuntu1 0
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise-updates/main amd64 Packages

Faheem Mitha

Ok, libglib2.0-0 should be at 2.32.4-0ubuntu1, but isn't.

Try apt-get install libglib2.0-0

MichaelJohn

# apt-get install libglib2.0-0
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these:
The following packages have unmet dependencies.
python-appindicator : Depends: libappindicator1 (= 0.4.92-0ubuntu1) but 0.4.92-0ubuntu1.1 is to be installed
python-uno : Depends: libreoffice-core (= 1:3.5.2-2ubuntu1) but 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7 is to be installed
E: Unmet dependencies. Try 'apt-get -f install' with no packages (or specify a solution).

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn Hmm, Ok, that's not terribly helpful. Try dpkg -P --force-depends libglib2.0-0.

Warning, this is potentially dangerous, but your system has problems anyway

No, scratch that, try apt-get install --reinstall libglib2.0-0

Though my quess is that won't work.

Ok, how do I un-mark that message? Bugger.

MichaelJohn

16:26

Had run so here is output:-

# dpkg -P --force-depends libglib2.0-0
dpkg: libglib2.0-0: dependency problems, but removing anyway as you requested:
liblaunchpad-integration1 depends on libglib2.0-0 (>= 2.12.0).
mate-system-monitor depends on libglib2.0-0 (>= 2.16.0).
upower depends on libglib2.0-0 (>= 2.30.0); however:
Package libglib2.0-0 is to be removed.
policykit-1 depends on libglib2.0-0 (>= 2.28.0).
libgnome-desktop-3-2 depends on libglib2.0-0 (>= 2.31.8).
libgstreamer-plugins-bad0.10-0 depends on libglib2.0-0 (>= 2.31.8).

Faheem Mitha

Ok, now try apt-get install libglib2.0-0 again.

MichaelJohn

@FaheemMitha Shall I try the reinstall?

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn you removed libglib2.0-0, now just try a straight install.

MichaelJohn

# apt-get install libglib2.0-0
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these:
The following packages have unmet dependencies.
python-appindicator : Depends: libappindicator1 (= 0.4.92-0ubuntu1) but 0.4.92-0ubuntu1.1 is to be installed
python-uno : Depends: libreoffice-core (= 1:3.5.2-2ubuntu1) but 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7 is to be installed
E: Unmet dependencies. Try 'apt-get -f install' with no packages (or specify a solution).

Faheem Mitha

Ok, one slightly drastic approach is to do a force-depends purge on all of these.

dpkg -P --force-depends python-appindicator libappindicator1 python-uno libreoffice-core

MichaelJohn

16:36

# dpkg -P --force-depends python-appindicator libappindicator1 python-uno libreoffice-core
dpkg: error processing python-appindicator (--purge):
Package is in a very bad inconsistent state - you should
reinstall it before attempting a removal.
dpkg: libreoffice-core: dependency problems, but removing anyway as you requested:
libreoffice-calc depends on libreoffice-core (= 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7).
libreoffice-draw depends on libreoffice-core (= 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7).
libreoffice-gtk depends on libreoffice-core (= 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7).

Faheem Mitha

Ok, try apt-get install libglib2.0-0 again

Braiam

@Anthon AFAIK is new

MichaelJohn

apt-get install libglib2.0-0Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these:
The following packages have unmet dependencies.
libappindicator0.1-cil : Depends: libappindicator1 but it is not going to be installed
libreoffice : Depends: libreoffice-core (= 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7) but it is not going to be installed
libreoffice-base : Depends: libreoffice-core (= 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7) but it is not going to be installed

Faheem Mitha

Ok, try apt-get -f install

MichaelJohn

Riunning...

# apt-get -f install
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Correcting dependencies... Done
The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required:
libgeis1 libframe6 libgrail5 libgnome2-bin
Use 'apt-get autoremove' to remove them.
The following extra packages will be installed:
accountsservice bamfdaemon brasero brasero-cdrkit brasero-common compiz-core
compiz-gnome compiz-plugins-default dconf-gsettings-backend dconf-service

Faheem Mitha

16:47

Try fixing libssl1.0. manually.

apt-get download libssl1.0.. This will produce a deb file.Then run dpkg -i libssl1.0...deb

One sec. Is libssl1.0.0 still installed?

dpkg -l libssl1.0.0 please

MichaelJohn

# dpkg -l libssl1.0.0
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version Description
+++-==============-==============-============================================
iU libssl1.0.0 1.0.1-4ubuntu5 SSL shared libraries

Faheem Mitha

Ok, let's purge that too.

dpkg -P --force-depends libssl1.0.0. Then try apt-get -f install again

MichaelJohn

# dpkg -P --force-depends libssl1.0.0
dpkg: libssl1.0.0: dependency problems, but removing anyway as you requested:
libdns81 depends on libssl1.0.0 (>= 1.0.0); however:
Package libssl1.0.0 is to be removed.
python-openssl depends on libssl1.0.0 (>= 1.0.0).
openssh-client depends on libssl1.0.0 (>= 1.0.0); however:
Package libssl1.0.0 is to be removed.
xchat depends on libssl1.0.0 (>= 1.0.0); however:
Package libssl1.0.0 is to be removed.
iputils-ping depends on libssl1.0.0 (>= 1.0.0).
crda depends on libssl1.0.0 (>= 1.0.0).

# apt-get -f install
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Correcting dependencies... Done
The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required:
libgeis1 libframe6 libgrail5 libgnome2-bin
Use 'apt-get autoremove' to remove them.
The following extra packages will be installed:
accountsservice bamfdaemon bind9-host brasero brasero-cdrkit brasero-common
compiz-core compiz-gnome compiz-plugins-default dconf-gsettings-backend

Faheem Mitha

Try running it again.

MichaelJohn

The apt-get -f install?

Faheem Mitha

17:00

@MichaelJohn yes, apt-get -f install

MichaelJohn

# apt-get -f install
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Correcting dependencies... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
libappindicator1 libreoffice-core python-appindicator python-uno
The following NEW packages will be installed
libappindicator1 libreoffice-core
The following packages will be upgraded:
python-appindicator python-uno
2 upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 616 not upgraded.
69 not fully installed or removed.

Faheem Mitha

Ok, this is getting to be a pain.

dpkg -l libssl1.0.0 please

MichaelJohn

# dpkg -l libssl1.0.0
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version Description
+++-==============-==============-============================================
iU libssl1.0.0 1.0.1-4ubuntu5 SSL shared libraries

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn hmm

MichaelJohn

Take 5...

Faheem Mitha

17:06

Unfortunately, I don't know what that error means.

What is dpkg -C showing now?

Try dpkg --configure -a.

I don't know if you have tried that yet.

MichaelJohn

Answering a call of nature to prevent an error :)

# dkpg -C
Could not find platform independent libraries <prefix>
Could not find platform dependent libraries <exec_prefix>
Consider setting $PYTHONHOME to <prefix>[:<exec_prefix>]
ImportError: No module named site

# dpkg --configure -a
Setting up libelf1 (0.152-1ubuntu3.1) ...
Setting up libssl1.0.0 (1.0.1-4ubuntu5.21) ...
Setting up libdbus-1-3 (1.4.18-1ubuntu1.7) ...
Setting up libexif12 (0.6.20-2ubuntu0.1) ...
Setting up libgcrypt11 (1.5.0-3ubuntu0.3) ...
Setting up libtasn1-3 (2.10-1ubuntu1.2) ...
Setting up libglib2.0-data (2.32.4-0ubuntu1) ...
Setting up tzdata-java (2015a-0ubuntu0.12.04) ...
Setting up libudev0 (175-0ubuntu9.9) ...
Setting up libc-dev-bin (2.15-0ubuntu10.10) ...
Setting up linux-libc-dev (3.2.0-76.111) ...

Faheem Mitha

Run dpkg --configure -a again

MichaelJohn

# dpkg --configure -a
dpkg: error processing python-apt (--configure):
Package is in a very bad inconsistent state - you should
reinstall it before attempting configuration.
Errors were encountered while processing:
python-apt

Braiam

sudo apt-get --reinstall install python-apt

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn yes, give that a try

Braiam

17:19

@MichaelJohn after that, post the output of sudo dpkg -C again

MichaelJohn

# sudo apt-get --reinstall install python-apt
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these:
The following packages have unmet dependencies.
libappindicator0.1-cil : Depends: libappindicator1 but it is not going to be installed
libreoffice : Depends: libreoffice-core (= 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7) but it is not going to be installed
libreoffice-base : Depends: libreoffice-core (= 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7) but it is not going to be installed

Faheem Mitha

Sigh. Run apt-get -f install again.

Braiam

@MichaelJohn apt-get download python-apt && sudo dpkg --install python-apt

and then sudo dpkg -C

Faheem Mitha

If that doesn't work, try purging python-apt. I don't think anything depends on it. First try apt-get purge python-apt. If that doesn't work, then dpkg -P --force-depends python-apt

MichaelJohn

# sudo dpkg -C
The following packages are in a mess due to serious problems during
installation. They must be reinstalled for them (and any packages
that depend on them) to function properly:
python-appindicator Python bindings for libappindicator
python-apt Python interface to libapt-pkg
python-uno Python-UNO bridge

Faheem Mitha

17:22

@MichaelJohn actually hang on a second.

back up to the earlier problem

dpkg -l libssl1.0.0

Is that fixed now?

Also run:

dpkg -l python-appindicator python-apt python-uno

Braiam

@FaheemMitha is recommendable that he fix what dpkg is detecting, and then deal with the other problems down the road

MichaelJohn

# dpkg -l libssl1.0.0
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version Description
+++-==============-==============-============================================
ii libssl1.0.0 1.0.1-4ubuntu5 SSL shared libraries

Faheem Mitha

Ok, that's good.

@Braiam Yes, sounds reasonable.

Ok, @Braiam, you take over.

Braiam

actually, I'm leaving D:

Faheem Mitha

But run dpkg -l python-appindicator python-apt python-uno first

@MichaelJohn ^^

@Braiam ok

MichaelJohn

17:27

# dpkg -l python-appindicator python-apt python-uno
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version Description
+++-==============-==============-============================================
pFR python-appindi 0.4.92-0ubuntu Python bindings for libappindicator
iFR python-apt 0.8.3ubuntu7 Python interface to libapt-pkg
pFR python-uno 1:3.5.2-2ubunt Python-UNO bridge

Braiam

@MichaelJohn apt-get download python-appindicator python-apt python-uno && sudo dpkg --install python*

Faheem Mitha

I'd be explicit, just to be safe.

dpkg -i <add the actual deb filenames here>

MichaelJohn

# apt-get download python-appindicator python-apt python-uno
Get:1 Downloading python-appindicator 0.4.92-0ubuntu1.1 [44.3 kB]
Get:2 Downloading python-apt 0.8.3ubuntu7.3 [187 kB]
Get:3 Downloading python-uno 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu7 [158 kB]
Fetched 389 kB in 0s (664 kB/s)

# sudo dpkg --install python-appindicator python-apt python-uno
dpkg: error processing python-appindicator (--install):
cannot access archive: No such file or directory
dpkg: error processing python-apt (--install):
cannot access archive: No such file or directory
dpkg: error processing python-uno (--install):
cannot access archive: No such file or directory
Errors were encountered while processing:
python-appindicator
python-apt
python-uno

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn no, you need to put the actual deb file names in there

python-appindicator..something....deb etc.

Or you could use a wildcard like @Braiam suggested

sudo dpkg --install python*

that's ok as long as you don't have any other deb files in there. To be safe, I'd put the names in explicitly. We don't want any more problems

MichaelJohn

S do I need to create an archive drectory in /etc/apt?

Faheem Mitha

17:39

@MichaelJohn No

What is the output of

ls -l *.deb

?

MichaelJohn

ls -l *.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 44272 Mar 7 2013 python-appindicator_0.4.92-0ubuntu1.1_amd64.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 186958 Jan 8 17:58 python-apt_0.8.3ubuntu7.3_amd64.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 158126 Nov 10 16:04 python-uno_3.5.7-0ubuntu7_amd64.deb

Faheem Mitha

Ok, just do

MichaelJohn

They are currently in /etc/apt

Faheem Mitha

sudo dpkg -i python*.deb

@MichaelJohn what is?

MichaelJohn

The .deb files...

Faheem Mitha

17:43

Or just dpkg -i *.deb in that same directory.

@MichaelJohn They would be in your current directory

When you run apt-get download. Which suggests you did apt-get download as root. Avoid doing that.

MichaelJohn

Thats where I was...

Faheem Mitha

Anyway, just cd to wherever they are and run that command

MichaelJohn

# sudo dpkg -i python*.deb
Selecting previously unselected package python-appindicator.
(Reading database ... 183085 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to replace python-appindicator 0.4.92-0ubuntu1 (using python-appindicator_0.4.92-0ubuntu1.1_amd64.deb) ...
Could not find platform independent libraries <prefix>
Could not find platform dependent libraries <exec_prefix>
Consider setting $PYTHONHOME to <prefix>[:<exec_prefix>]
ImportError: No module named site
dpkg: warning: subprocess old pre-removal script returned error exit status 1

Seem a lot of messages about libraries, PYTHONHOME and a module named site...

Faheem Mitha

Ok, you've got some pretty weird errors there.

Did you do a local install of python at any point? Or any local installs of any python related packages?

How new/old is this system, exactly?

What do you get if you do:

echo $PYTHONHOME

?

MichaelJohn

Someone else installed Python shortly after the OS was installed. |I added python-mysql via the Synaptic Package Manager

$PYTHONHOME gives a blank line...

Faheem Mitha

17:51

@MichaelJohn synaptic uses dpkg under the hood it wouldn't cause these problems.

Type which python

Also

dpkg -l | grep python2.

MichaelJohn

/usr/bin/python

Faheem Mitha

Also, check your .bashrc. Anything odd in there?

Python-related?

MichaelJohn

# dpkg -l | grep python2
ii libpython2.7 2.7.3-0ubuntu3.6 Shared Python runtime library (version 2.7)
ii python2.7 2.7.3-0ubuntu3.6 Interactive high-level object-oriented language (version 2.7)
ii python2.7-dbg 2.7.3-0ubuntu3.6 Debug Build of the Python Interpreter (version 2.7)
ii python2.7-dev 2.7.3-0ubuntu3.6 Header files and a static library for Python (v2.7)

Faheem Mitha

Anyone else got any ideas?

@MichaelJohn go into /usr/local and see if there is anything installed there.

Also apt-cache policy python2.7.

MichaelJohn

/usr/local has dirctories all dated in 2012 and a soft link from man->/share/man from last December - arond install time for OS

Faheem Mitha

17:58

@MichaelJohn do an ls -laR | less

inside /usr/local and see if there is anything python related there

MichaelJohn

# apt-get -cache policy python2.7
E: Opening configuration file ache - ifstream::ifstream (2: No such file or directory)

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn apt-cache policy python2.7

You have -cache

MichaelJohn

In /etc/local/lib there is a python2.7 directory

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn in /etc/local? You mean /usr/local?

and what is in there?

MichaelJohn

Yes brain fade...

dist-packages and site-packages

Faheem Mitha

18:05

@MichaelJohn do they look like regular libraries and stuff. Just do a list.

MichaelJohn

Both directories are empty...

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn ok, blind alley

Check your .bashrc, maybe?

MichaelJohn

Where is it?

Faheem Mitha

In your home directory.

Do a dpkg -l | grep python

There must be some problem with your python packages that is causing this.

But first take a look at .bashrc.

MichaelJohn

dpkg -l | grep python
ii libpython2.7 2.7.3-0ubuntu3.6 Shared Python runtime library (version 2.7)
ii python 2.7.3-0ubuntu2.2 interactive high-level object-oriented language (default version)
ii python-all 2.7.3-0ubuntu2.2 package depending on all supported Python runtime versions
iFR python-appindicator 0.4.92-0ubuntu1 Python bindings for libappindicator

Faheem Mitha

18:12

That's doesn't tell us anything we didn't already know.

MichaelJohn

TThere is a bash.bashrc in /etc - is that the one...

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn No, home directory. /home/user/.bashrc.

Ok, run

env | grep PYTHON

MichaelJohn

Only a .bash_history and a .bash_logout

Faheem Mitha

Also, paste this:

faheem@orwell:~$ python
Python 2.7.3 (default, Mar 13 2014, 11:03:55)
[GCC 4.7.2] on linux2
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
Could not open PYTHONSTARTUP
IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/home/faheem/.pythonrc'
>>> import sys; sys.path
['', '/usr/lib/python2.7', '/usr/lib/python2.7/plat-linux2', '/usr/lib/python2.7/lib-tk', '/usr/lib/python2.7/lib-old', '/usr/lib/python2.7/lib-dynload', '/home/faheem/.local/lib/python2.7/site-packages', '/usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages', '/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages', '/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-p…

for your machine obviously

Also env | grep PYTHON

MichaelJohn

Nothing from the env...

Faheem Mitha

18:18

Also take a look at /usr/lib/python2.7. Make sure it is non-empty. It should have a ton of stuff in it.

MichaelJohn

Python just gives errors with libraries, eetc...

Faheem Mitha

Can you run debsums -s?

@MichaelJohn Not sure what you mean.

Unfortunately you have to install debsums for that to work...

MichaelJohn

No /usr/lib/python2.7 directory

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn Ok, that's very wrong.

No wonder your python is not working.

MichaelJohn

Sorry I have to give someone a lift in a couple of minutes. Will you be around mid-next week as I have minor surgery on Monday...

Faheem Mitha

18:25

One sec.

@MichaelJohn Sure, ping me then. Is this your machine, or someone elses?

FYI /usr/lib/python2.7 is a rather part of a Python installation

MichaelJohn

This is one of my machines but they are all company ones... Many thanks for yourhelp and have a good weekend...

Faheem Mitha

@MichaelJohn you too

rather important part, sorry

Transcript for