mailman installation failing

[Noah]

Hi there,

apt-get clean did not help and I am still getting the same error.

Setting up mailman (1:2.1.9-9ubuntu1.2) ...
Installing site language es 
............................................. done.
Installing site language en ............................................ 
done.
Downgrade detected, from version 0x2010bf0 to version 0x20109f0
This is probably not safe.
Exiting.

what else can I try?


On 1/13/11 10:50 AM, MR ZenWiz wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 9:10 AM, Noah<noah-list at enabled.com>  wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> Looks like apt-get is attempting to downgrade mailman, any clues why this is
>> happening?  And also why it is failing.  Also the Machine is a 32 bit
>> machine so I am trying to figure out why
>> mailman_1%3a2.1.9-9ubuntu1.2_amd64.deb was ever installed in the first
>> place.
>>
>> # apt-get upgrade
>> Reading package lists... Done
>> Building dependency tree
>> Reading state information... Done
>> The following packages will be upgraded:
>>   mailman
>> 1 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
>> 12 not fully installed or removed.
>> Need to get 0B/8613kB of archives.
>> After this operation, 0B of additional disk space will be used.
>> Do you want to continue [Y/n]? y
>> Preconfiguring packages ...
>> (Reading database ... 46764 files and directories currently installed.)
>> Preparing to replace mailman 1:2.1.9-9ubuntu1.1 (using
>> .../mailman_1%3a2.1.9-9ubuntu1.2_amd64.deb) ...
>>   * Stopping Mailman master qrunner mailmanctl
>>        [ OK ]
>> dpkg: error processing
>> /var/cache/apt/archives/mailman_1%3a2.1.9-9ubuntu1.2_amd64.deb (--unpack):
>>   subprocess pre-installation script returned error exit status 1
>> Downgrade detected, from version 0x2010bf0 to version 0x20109f0
>> This is probably not safe.
>> Exiting.
>>
>
> This appears to be an upgrade using local cached archives, in which
> case it appears that your local cached copy of the newer mailman is
> corrupt.  You may want to run 'apt-get clean' and then try the upgrade
> again.
>