udisks won't upgrade
Hello Launchpad,
For a few weeks now »udisks« refuses to upgrade (it's held back) though it is in my upgrade list.
System: Kubuntu 14 LTS, x68_64 , 3.16.0-77-generic
In addition to that »apt-get update« end with the lines:
W: Ignoring Provides line with DepCompareOp for package gdb-minimal
W: Ignoring Provides line with DepCompareOp for package gdb-minimal
W: Probieren Sie »apt-get update«, um diese Probleme zu korrigieren.
Well, I don't know the exact English version of the last line, but I would translate it this way:
W: Try »apt-get update« to solve this problem.
Which in fact is a very useless warning …
Anyhow, how can I solve this?
What's missing?
Best regards,
Jens
Question information
- Language:
- English Edit question
- Status:
- Solved
- For:
- Ubuntu Edit question
- Assignee:
- No assignee Edit question
- Solved by:
- Manfred Hampl
- Solved:
- Last query:
- Last reply:
Revision history for this message
|
#1 |
For diagnostic purposes please provide the output of the commands
uname -a
lsb_release -crid
apt-get --version
LANG=C sudo apt-get update
LANG=C sudo apt-get dist-upgrade
Revision history for this message
|
#2 |
uname -a
Linux Bumskopp 3.16.0-77-generic #99~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Tue Jun 28 19:17:10 UTC 2016 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
----------
lsb_release -crid
Distributor ID: Ubuntu
Description: Ubuntu 14.04.5 LTS
Release: 14.04
Codename: trusty
----------
apt-get --version
apt 1.0.1ubuntu2 für amd64, kompiliert am Apr 12 2018 10:14:36
Unterstützte Module:
*Ver: Standard .deb
*Pkg: Debian dpkg interface (Priority 30)
Pkg: Debian APT solver interface (Priority -1000)
S.L: 'deb' Standard Debian binary tree
S.L: 'deb-src' Standard Debian source tree
Idx: Debian Source Index
Idx: Debian Package Index
Idx: Debian Translation Index
Idx: Debian dpkg status file
Idx: EDSP scenario file
----------
LANG=C sudo apt-get update
Hit http://
Ign http://
Ign http://
Hit http://
Get:1 http://
Get:2 http://
Ign http://
Get:3 http://
Get:4 http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Get:5 http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Get:6 http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Get:7 http://
Hit http://
Get:8 http://
Get:9 http://
Ign http://
Hit https:/
Hit http://
Get:10 http://
Hit http://
Hit https:/
Hit https:/
Get:11 http://
Hit http://
Hit https:/
Get:12 http://
Hit https:/
Hit https:/
Get:13 http://
Ign http://
Get:14 https:/
Ign http://
Get:15 http://
Ign http://
Get:16 https:/
Ign http://
Get:17 http://
Get:18 http://
Get:19 http://
Get:20 http://
Hit http://
Get:21 http://
Get:22 http://
Hit http://
Ign http://
Hit http://
Ign http://
Hit http://
Ign https:/
Hit http://
Ign https:/
Hit http://
Ign https:/
Hit http://
Ign https:/
Get:23 http://
Hit http://
Get:24 http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Get:25 http://
Hit http://
Get:26 http://
Ign http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Ign http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Get:27 http://
Get:28 http://
Get:29 http://
Get:30 http://
Hit http://
Get:31 http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Get:32 http://
Hit http://
Get:33 http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Get:34 http://
Hit http://
Get:35 http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Get:36 http://
Get:37 http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Get:38 http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Get:39 http://
Hit http://
Get:40 http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Hit http://
Fetched 7795 kB in 10s (746 kB/s)
Reading package lists... Done
W: Ignoring Provides line with DepCompareOp for package gdb-minimal
W: Ignoring Provides line with DepCompareOp for package gdb-minimal
W: You may want to run apt-get update to correct these problems
----------
LANG=C sudo apt-get dist-upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Calculating upgrade... Done
The following packages have been kept back:
thunderbird thunderbird-
xul-ext-lightning
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 4 not upgraded.
----------
LANG=C sudo apt-get upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Calculating upgrade... Done
The following packages have been kept back:
thunderbird thunderbird-
xul-ext-lightning
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 5 not upgraded.
----------
I added this last command because it's the only one that reports this udisks issue.
Please ignore the kept back thunderbird packages. I hold them back by purpose – since yesterday – (sudo apt-mark hold thunderbird) because I hate this new ugly and nonsense flat design coming up with version 60.
And thank you for this "LANG=C" prefix! I was always wondering how to get these English messages for an easier web search. :)
I hope this will help. Actually I can't remember exactly since when this udisks problem occurred but it surely must have been since the last rollout of it – maybe weeks ago.
Thank you in anticipation.
Revision history for this message
|
#3 |
What is the output of:
sudo apt-get install udisks
This will upgrade only that package.
Thanks
Revision history for this message
|
#4 |
In my opinion there are two different issues, which are not related to each other.
1. There is that warning message
W: Ignoring Provides line with DepCompareOp for package gdb-minimal
W: You may want to run apt-get update to correct these problems
This should not block the updates, because it is only a warning.
I assume that it is caused by a combination of
- an old apt version (1.0.1... which is the one for Ubuntu trusty)
- one of the repositories using already contents that are designed for a higher version.
2. The udisks package is held back when issuing "apt-get update", but not "apt-get dist-upgrade"
For the second point I suggest that for diagnostic purposes you issue the commands
apt-cache policy udisks
apt-get --simulate install udisks
and copy/paste the output.
Revision history for this message
|
#5 |
@actionparsnip:
Thank you. I will first try the suggestion of Manfred Hampl as it seems to be more "educative" for me. If this won't help I can try yours.
==========
@Manfred Hampl:
OK, first to the output of the udisks commands:
----------
apt-cache policy udisks
udisks:
Installed: 1.0.5-1
Candidate: 1.0.5-1build1
Version table:
1.0.5-1build1 0
500 http://
*** 1.0.5-1 0
500 http://
100 /var/lib/
----------
apt-get --simulate install udisks
NOTE: This is only a simulation!
apt-get needs root privileges for real execution.
Keep also in mind that locking is deactivated,
so don't depend on the relevance to the real current situation!
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
udisks
Suggested packages:
mdadm
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 4 not upgraded.
----------
Hm, is udisks dependent on mdadm? I don't use any RAID, just simple MBR single partitions all separate and independent, but multiple partitions on multiple discs – if this might be necessary.
Or should I simply follow the suggestion of actionparsnip?
Now to gdb-minimal:
On the web I found a couple of Ubuntu links all offline:
https:/
https:/
https:/
https:/
Oh, the whole site is down. Could that be a problem?
„I assume that it is caused by a combination of
- an old apt version (1.0.1... which is the one for Ubuntu trusty)
- one of the repositories using already contents that are designed for a higher version.“
How can I solve this?
Gosh! On Windows I am a master but on Linux I'm a real dumbass!
Maybe it's just because I only learn when errors happen and here they happen too few … ;P
Thanks for your patience :)
Revision history for this message
|
#6 |
packages.ubuntu.com is just an information plattform. In case that this site is down, this should have absolutely no influence on installation of packages.
The output of your command
udisks:
Installed: 1.0.5-1
Candidate: 1.0.5-1build1
Version table:
1.0.5-1build1 0
500 http://
*** 1.0.5-1 0
500 http://
100 /var/lib/
tells the following:
You have udisks version 1.0.5-1 from the standard Ubuntu repositories installed, and there is a version with a higher number (1.0.5-1build1) available from deb.pinguin.lu which is not a repository
Revision history for this message
|
#7 |
sorry, pressed "send" to early
which is not a repository from Ubuntu, but something foreign.
Apparently the package udisks suggests to also install mdadm, and there seems to be some restriction with that package.
I do not think that there is anything around that "W: Ignoring Provides line with DepCompareOp " warning that needs being solved.
What is the output of the command
apt-cache policy gdb-minimal mdadm
Revision history for this message
|
#8 |
I already was wondering where from I got "deb.pinguin.lu".
It is from fred (Forensic Registry EDitor, https:/
AAHHH!!! 💡
So I need to install this pinguin-version of udisks ( http://
Is that correct?
Hmm, I thought their package server ( https:/
Or will this cause other compatibility/
Should I then increase the preference ranking (or how ever this 500 is called) for the pinguin-version and if so, how?
I think I slowly understand more … at least I hope so … x)
==========
apt-cache policy gdb-minimal mdadm
gdb-minimal:
Installed: 7.7.1-0ubuntu5~
Candidate: 7.7.1-0ubuntu5~
Version table:
*** 7.7.1-0ubuntu5~
500 http://
500 http://
100 /var/lib/
7.7-0ubuntu3 0
500 http://
mdadm:
Installed: (none)
Candidate: 3.2.5-5ubuntu4.4
Version table:
3.
500 http://
3.2.5-5ubuntu4 0
500 http://
----------
I'm not sure how to interpret this.
Revision history for this message
|
#9 |
My suggestion now is that you
1. ignore the warning messages (I was not able to identify the real root cause, but it should not do any harm anyway)
2. install the updated udisks package with the command
sudo apt-get install udisks
Revision history for this message
|
#10 |
OK, I did, but this is the output:
sudo apt-get install udisks
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
udisks
Suggested packages:
mdadm
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 4 not upgraded.
So, nothing happens
I then tried the same including mdadm and suddenly this CLI-Dialog (blue bakground) "Package Configuration" appeared – never have seen this one!!!
I couldn't cancel it so I just killed the terminal.
Well, starting sudo apt-get update again to check out if something changed, it now ends with this line
E: dpkg was interrupted, you must manually run 'sudo dpkg --configure -a' to correct the problem.
Seems as if I'm AFU …
How can I undo this … whatever it was?
(-_-)
Revision history for this message
|
#11 |
This kind of dialogue stems from the time when there was just command line with keyboard and no windows-oriented display with mouse.
You have to use the Tab and Back-Tab (=Shift-Tab) keys to navigate from item to item, use the space bar to select or unselect an item and use the Enter key to confirm.
Issue the command
sudo dpkg --configure -a
and navigate through the screen(s), selecting the most appropriate answers. (In your case it's probably 'Keine Konfiguration' - unless you are really running a postfix mail transfer agent).
Revision history for this message
|
#12 |
OK, I know these kind of dialogues from the old DOS times (e.g. Norton Commander) and such non-GUI programs like CloneZilla Live, but I never had this on (K)Ubuntu. So I was irritated as this mostly configures something very system basic.
The '<Cancel>' button didn't stopped this configuration process as the calling threat just kept starting this dialogue again and again and so it didn't allowed the option to abort this configuration.
So now, I tried the dpkg command but this time the dialogue didn't come up. Just this (sorry, I forgot to use LANG=C):
----------
Trigger für man-db (2.6.7.1-1ubuntu1) werden verarbeitet ...
Trigger für ureadahead (0.100.0-16) werden verarbeitet ...
ureadahead will be reprofiled on next reboot
mdadm (3.2.5-5ubuntu4.4) wird eingerichtet ...
Generating mdadm.conf... done.
Removing any system startup links for /etc/init.
update-initramfs: deferring update (trigger activated)
Grub-Konfigurat
Linux-Abbild gefunden: /boot/vmlinuz-
initrd-Abbild gefunden: /boot/initrd.
Linux-Abbild gefunden: /boot/vmlinuz-
initrd-Abbild gefunden: /boot/initrd.
Found memtest86+ image: /boot/memtest86
Found memtest86+ image: /boot/memtest86
MS-DOS 5.x/6.x/Win3.1 auf /dev/sdb11 gefunden
Windows 7 (loader) auf /dev/sdc1 gefunden
Windows 7 (loader) auf /dev/sdc2 gefunden
MS-DOS 5.x/6.x/Win3.1 auf /dev/sdd7 gefunden
erledigt
* Starting MD monitoring service mdadm --monitor [ OK ]
Trigger für ureadahead (0.100.0-16) werden verarbeitet ...
Trigger für initramfs-tools (0.103ubuntu4.11) werden verarbeitet ...
update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.
W: mdadm: /etc/mdadm/
----------
***
By the way:
Is every FAT16 partition interpreted as a DOS/Win16 system partition or is it because of my 'DOS' folder (no DOS config files, no DOS system, just DOS/cmd tools)?
***
As I can take from /etc/mdadm/
----------
# mdadm.conf
#
# Please refer to mdadm.conf(5) for information about this file.
#
# by default (built-in), scan all partitions (/proc/partitions) and all
# containers for MD superblocks. alternatively, specify devices to scan, using
# wildcards if desired.
#DEVICE partitions containers
# auto-create devices with Debian standard permissions
CREATE owner=root group=disk mode=0660 auto=yes
# automatically tag new arrays as belonging to the local system
HOMEHOST <system>
# instruct the monitoring daemon where to send mail alerts
MAILADDR root
# definitions of existing MD arrays
# This file was auto-generated on Sat, 20 Oct 2018 02:03:45 +0200
# by mkconf $Id$
----------
Thank God, 'sudo apt-get purge <package>' really works without any garbage remnants like on Windoze! [:deep breath:] xD
Well, for now, I'm back to where I started:
----------
LANG=C sudo apt-get upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Calculating upgrade... Done
The following packages have been kept back:
thunderbird thunderbird-
xul-ext-lightning
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 5 not upgraded.
----------
with udisks still being kept back.
But it was an interesting excursion into something new!
Revision history for this message
|
#13 |
What do you get for the command
sudo apt-get install udisks=
Revision history for this message
|
#14 |
The same result:
----------
sudo apt-get install udisks=
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
udisks
Suggested packages:
mdadm
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 4 not upgraded.
----------
Nothing helps. Neither any try of any udisks package with apt-get install, ~ update, ~ upgrade and ~dist-upgrade nor apt-mark unhold changes anything.
As far as I interpret this problem it could be a version (build) conflict from two different sources maybe with equal priorities.
But most likely I did not yet understand how the apt system really works and this is nonsense.
Revision history for this message
|
#15 |
Last attempt
sudo apt-get install --reinstall udisks=
Revision history for this message
|
#16 |
Again:
sudo apt-get install --reinstall udisks=
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
udisks
Suggested packages:
mdadm
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 4 not upgraded.
I just found an article on UbuntuUsers.de about "DeviceKit" that contains "udisks2" and in addition "upower".
This caught my attention, because I have another problem on resuming from STR sleep mode which takes around 1½ min before the System/GUI can react to keyboard (PS/2) input. Everything is working – keyboard reacts on all shift changes & mouse is moving – but the system will not accept any input. But input is buffered so after this timeout it executes my input.
This is a minor error and until now it didn't cause more than inconvenience.
But now I'm wondering, if there could be a correlation between my old DeviceKit version and these two problems. Maybe an upgrade to version 2 might be helpful.
Well, howsoever, is it possible to upgrade to a version 2 on Trusty and if so, how?
Revision history for this message
|
#17 |
I just found this
apt list --installed
…
udisks/trusty,now 1.0.5-1 amd64 [installed,
udisks2/
…
upower/trusty,now 0.9.23-2ubuntu1 amd64 [installed,
…
So this makes my last thought – at least with regard of udisks – obsolete.
But I think I need to install version 1.0.5-1build1 manually. The repository from pinguin.lu – which demands this version – does not seem to update automatically.
Revision history for this message
|
#18 |
OK, I think I found the source of the trouble:
----------
LANG=C sudo dpkg -i udisks_
(Reading database ... 300705 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack udisks_
Unpacking udisks (1.0.5-1build1) over (1.0.5-1build1) ...
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of udisks:
udisks depends on libparted2 (>= 3.1); however:
Package libparted2 is not installed.
dpkg: error processing package udisks (--install):
dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
Processing triggers for man-db (2.6.7.1-1ubuntu1) ...
Errors were encountered while processing:
udisks
----------
libparted2 seems not to be available for Trusty (just Xenial++).
(-_-)
I guess – if you don't have any alternative solution – I will have to live with that …
Well, my last hope is that – like with MONO or Wine or whatever it was – I could install a Xenial package.
Does that work or not?
Revision history for this message
|
#19 |
Congratulations, you have identified the reason why the pinguin.lu udisks package could not be installed. It seems that the version of apt in trusty is too old to show the cause in a reasonable way.
There are some PPAs with libparted2 (>= 3.1) for trusty, e.g. https:/
or https:/
If you want to get rid of that "there is a higher version of udisks available" (but it cannot be installed) message, you could try adding that PPA. This should enable installing libparted2, and allow upgrading udisks to the last version available.
In any case, you have be aware that support for Ubuntu 14.04 (trusty) will end in April next year (unless you pay for extended maintenance). You should develop a plan for upgrading to a newer release early enough.
Revision history for this message
|
#20 |
Thanks Manfred Hampl, that solved my question.
Revision history for this message
|
#21 |
YES! These PPA's solved it finally!!!
I selected the PPA for "Miscellaneous System Packages" and "trusty tar". In addition I've got a bunch of upgrades to my ntfs-3g, gparted an much more!
Hopefully, this all will also get me closer to solutions with some other problems.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK, YOU!! You really helped a lot!
I still didn't quite understand how this site (launchpad) really works, but that PPA search function will surely be helpful.
I know Trusty is running out of support soon but I still need a special video cutter that hasn't yet been properly ported to a newer Ubuntu LTS version and I couldn't find yet a nice desktop.
I love KDE and all its handsome and marvellous programs/tools but I really, really hate that ugly and nonsense flat design in plasma 5! It's one of the idiocies of Win8/10 which made me turn my back on Windows forever.
Universe is nice too, but I after 30 years of Windows I can't get used to the window close button on the "wrong" side. xD
Well, I still have half a year to find me something.
I didn't know that extended maintenance for trusty is possible at all. How much would that be – roughly?
Revision history for this message
|
#22 |
The remark "unless you pay for extended maintenance" was meant as comment that there are some limited possibilities, but not as an advice to use it. I doubt that it will be applicable for you.
Main focus for extended security maintenance are server systems still running Ubuntu 12.04, it is about critical fixes for server programs, and it is limited until April 2019.
My assumption was that this 12.04 ESM will be followed by a similar feature for Ubuntu 14.04 (probably limited until April 2021).
Details here: https:/
Revision history for this message
|
#23 |
Oops! 150 $/year for at least 50 units is definitely NOT an option! xD
Thanks anyway for the hint.