[ATrpms-users] Re: Unmet Dependencies and Confusion

[Axel Thimm]

On Sat, Jul 17, 2004 at 01:03:51PM -0400, George Galt wrote:
> Thanks for the response.  No, you didn't tell me to delete the database, 
> it is just my inexperience showing!  I had used the command
> rm -f /var/lib/rpm/__*, and assumed (since I then rebuilt the database) 
> that it deleted the database.  Clearly I was wrong.  Sorry.
> 
> So back to the original problem, rpm -q bask libstdc++ says that these 
> packages are not installed, and doing
> 
> rm -f /var/lib/rpm/__*
> LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.4.1 rpm --rebuilddb
> 
> does not fix the issue.  RPM still reports that these packages are not 
> installed.

What does rpm -qa | wc -l yield? If a too small number, then your
database is lost, otherwise maybe a couple of packages have been
forgotten in the database.

> Is there another way to get the database to remember what is supposed to 
> be in it?  Should I attempt to reinstall the package configuration? I 
> did notice in other sections of the list that some people had used yum 
> instead with some success, should I try that route?  I can always fall 
> back on reinstalling the OS and starting from scratch with apt-get, but 
> I hate to do that (will lower the WAF of the MythTV box!!), though I'm 
> prepared!

I'd reinstall. You can of course start reinstalling packages so that
they reappear in the database, but it will take you less time to reinstall.

> One separate question, should I periodically update the package 
> configuration from your site on this box (and my other ones too) or does 
> apt-get dist-upgrade fetch the new configurations as well?

The latter.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.atrpms.net/pipermail/atrpms-users/attachments/20040717/081e8061/attachment-0001.bin