feisty beta: broken dependencies

[Wenzhuo Zhang]

Wenzhuo Zhang wrote:
> I just upgraded from edgy to feisty beta, and came across many packages with broken dependencies:
> 
> $ sudo apt-get install gnucash
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree       
> Reading state information... Done
> Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
> requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
> distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
> or been moved out of Incoming.
> 
> Since you only requested a single operation it is extremely likely that
> the package is simply not installable and a bug report against
> that package should be filed.
> The following information may help to resolve the situation:
> 
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>   gnucash: Depends: libgtkhtml3.8-15 (>= 3.13.6) but it is not installable
> E: Broken packages

As Adri2000 pointed out off-list, this is a known problem
<https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnucash/+bug/92477>.

> $ sudo aptitude search "~b"
> iB  cdrdao                          - records CDs in Disk-At-Once (DAO) mode    
> iB  compiz-gtk                      - OpenGL window and compositing manager - Gt
> iB  desktop-effects                 - preferences applet for configuring desktop
> iB  dia-libs                        - Diagram editor (library files)            
> iB  evolution                       - groupware suite with mail client and organ
> iB  f-spot                          - personal photo management application     
> iB  gaim                            - multi-protocol instant messaging client   
> iB  gedit                           - light-weight text editor                  
> iB  gnome-mag                       - a screen magnifier for the GNOME desktop  
> iB  gnome-orca                      - scriptable screen reader                  
> iB  gs-esp                          - The Ghostscript PostScript interpreter - E
> iB  libbtctl4                       - GObject Bluetooth library                 
> iB  libdevmapper1.02                - The Linux Kernel Device Mapper userspace l
> iB  libgnome-speech3                - GNOME text-to-speech library              
> iB  libmono-system1.0-cil           - Mono System libraries (1.0)               
> iB  libndesk-dbus-glib1.0-cil       - CLI implementation of D-Bus (GLib mainloop
> iB  libndesk-dbus1.0-cil            - CLI implementation of D-Bus               
> cB  libofx3                         - library to support Open Financial Exchange
> iB  libsasl2-2                      - Authentication abstraction library        
> iB  libxalan2-java                  - XSL Transformations (XSLT) processor in Ja
> iB  libxcb1-dev                     - X C Binding, development files            
> iB  libxerces2-java                 - Validating XML parser for Java with DOM le
> iB  openoffice.org                  - OpenOffice.org Office suite               
> iB  openoffice.org-common           - OpenOffice.org office suite architecture i
> iB  python                          - An interactive high-level object-oriented 
> iB  python-minimal                  - A minimal subset of the Python language (d
> iB  python-uno                      - Python interface for OpenOffice.org       
> iB  restricted-manager              - manage non-free hardware drivers          
> iB  rhythmbox                       - music player and organizer for GNOME      
> iB  tomboy                          - desktop note taking program using Wiki sty
> iB  ubuntu-desktop                  - The Ubuntu desktop system                 
> iB  update-manager                  - GNOME application that manages apt updates
> iB  update-manager-core             - manage release upgrades                   

This is not a real problem. The aptitude UI prompted dependancy problems upon start. After I applied its suggestions, all the above Broken flags are gone. Aptitude didn't install any packages in the process. Could it be a bug of aptitude itself?

One kind fellow pointed out off-list that it's not a proper place to discuss the dependency problem, and that I should file a bug report instead. Is this the etiquette or the policy of the ubuntu-devel-discuss list? Personally I cannot agree with him. On the contrary, I think people should search the bug tracking system and/or discuss it on mailing list first before filing new bugs. Open discussion mailing lists are not cathedrals; they are bazaars. Subscribers should be encouraged to talk whatever to the point.

Wenzhuo