Preparing to unpack .../texlive-science-doc_2013.20140314-1_all.deb ... Unpacking context (2013.05.28.20130704-3) over (2012.05.30.20120611-1) ... How do I know that? Unpacking texlive-science-doc (2013.20140314-1) over (2012.20120611-2) ... this contact form
If you have problems with combination of packages in a LaTeX document, please consult your local TeX User Group, the comp.text.tex user group, the author of the original .sty file, or De-configuring texlive-base (2012.20120611-5) ... Preparing to unpack .../texlive-metapost-doc_2013.20140314-1_all.deb ... texlive-doc-pt depends on texlive-doc-base (>= 2012.20120516).
dpkg: texlive-common: dependency problems, but removing anyway as you requested: texlive-fonts-extra-doc depends on texlive-common (>= 2012.20120516); however: Package texlive-common is to be removed. Preparing to unpack .../texlive-doc-ja_2013.20140314-1_all.deb ... In particular, bugs that are related to up-upstream, i.e., neither Debian nor TeX Live (upstream), but the original package authors, will be closed immediately. *** The Debian TeX Team is *not* Unpacking texlive-fonts-recommended-doc (2013.20140314-1) over (2012.20120611-5) ...
Unpacking texlive-doc-ko (2013.20140314-1) over (2012.20120611-1) ... Unpacking texlive-latex-recommended-doc (2013.20140314-1) over (2012.20120611-5) ... Copy sent to Debian TeX Maintainers
This could be installed by sudo dpkg -i texlive-dummy_1.0_all.deb Afterwards Kile could be installed without to request any texlive package from the repositories and Kile worked fine with TeX Live 2008. Preparing to unpack .../texlive-latex-base-doc_2013.20140314-1_all.deb ... It says that " texlive-base conflicts with dvipdfmx texlive-dummy provides dvipdfmx and is to be installed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Unpacking texlive-latex-base (2013.20140314-1) over (2012.20120611-5) ... Preparing to unpack .../texlive-fonts-recommended_2013.20140314-1_all.deb ... texlive-doc-en depends on texlive-doc-base (>= 2012.20120516). Debian distribution maintenance software pp.
dpkg: regarding .../texlive-base_2013.20140314-1_all.deb containing texlive-base: texlive-base conflicts with texlive-omega (<< 2013.20130512) texlive-omega (version 2012.20120611-5) is present and installed. More hints Can two different firmware files have same md5 sum? Send a report that this bug log contains spam. Preparing to unpack .../texlive-metapost_2013.20140314-1_all.deb ...
Preparing to unpack .../texlive-humanities_2013.20140314-1_all.deb ... http://codentropy.com/dpkg-error/dpkg-error-processing-redmine-configure.html Replacing files in old package texlive-latex-extra-doc (2012.20120611-2) ... Last modified: Sun Oct 9 13:02:30 2016; Machine Name: beach Debian Bug tracking system Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Stefan Reply Stefan Kottwitz says July 4, 2009 at 6:17 pm Hi Phil, thank you for your contribution!
Replacing files in old package texlive-latex-recommended-doc (2012.20120611-5) ... Acknowledgement sent to Sami Liedes
Acknowledgement sent to Axel Beckert
dpkg: error processing archive /var/cache/apt/archives/texlive-omega_2013.20140314-1_all.deb (--unpack): trying to overwrite '/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/omega/ocp/misc/id.ocp', which is also in package texlive-base 2012.20120611-5 dpkg-deb: error: subprocess paste was killed by signal (Broken pipe) Preparing to unpack .../texlive-pictures_2013.20140314-1_all.deb
A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Find the Swirling Words! How could MACUSA exist in 1693 or be in Washington in 1777? Norbert Preining
They are depending on even more packages. No further changes may be made. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. his comment is here texlive-latex-recommended depends on texlive-binaries (>= 2012-0).
According to the policy stated above, when dpkg sorts out the dependencies, it's going to prefer a "real" package over a virtual one if a dependency lists a specific version number. Preparing to unpack .../texlive-humanities-doc_2013.20140314-1_all.deb ... Preparing to unpack .../texlive-full_2013.20140314-1_all.deb ... Unpacking texlive-metapost-doc (2013.20140314-1) over (2012.20120611-5) ...
Unpacking texlive-formats-extra (2013.20140314-1) over (2012.20120611-2) ... Last modified: Sun Oct 9 13:02:30 2016; Machine Name: beach Debian Bug tracking system Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. texlive-doc-ru depends on texlive-doc-base (>= 2012.20120516). Unpacking texlive-doc-th (2013.20140314-1) over (2012.20120611-1) ...
I don't know why this was not caught. I tried to build a texlive-dummy in order to install LyX with the following packages in texlive.ctl (on Karmic): dvipdfmx, dvipng, lacheck, latex-beamer, latex-xcolor, pgf, preview-latex-style, psutils, tex-common, texlive-base, texlive-base-bin, texlive-base-bin-doc, leafpad /etc/apt/sources.list apt-get clean && apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade Last edited by jfranco; 2016-02-09 at 03:50 AM. Reply Shujie says December 2, 2011 at 12:48 am Hi, Stefan I am using ubuntu 10.04 and texlive 2011.
My math students consider me a harsh grader. I have never installed the texlive through the apt-get. Preparing to unpack .../texlive-luatex_2013.20140314-1_all.deb ... my texlive.ctl has: Section: tex Package: texlive-dummy Provides: texlive-latex-base, asymptote, asymptote-doc, context, dblatex, dvipdfmx, dvipng, feynmf, guile-1.8, lacheck, latex-beamer, latex-xcolor, latex2html, libsigsegv0, lilypond, lilypond-data, lilypond-doc, lmodern, luatex, pgf, preview-latex-style, prosper, ps2eps,
Preparing to unpack .../texlive-omega_2013.20140314-1_all.deb ... You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.