package libgs9:i386 9.18~dfsg~0-0ubuntu2.3 failed to install/upgrade: package libgs9:i386 is already installed and configured
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
dpkg (Ubuntu) |
New
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned |
Bug Description
An error occurred while updating the system
Description: Ubuntu 16.04.1 LTS
Release: 16.04
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 16.04
Package: libgs9:i386 9.18~dfsg~
ProcVersionSign
Uname: Linux 4.4.0-53-lowlatency i686
ApportVersion: 2.20.1-0ubuntu2.1
AptdaemonVersion: 1.1.1+bzr982-
Architecture: i386
CupsErrorLog: E [08/Dec/
Date: Thu Dec 8 10:04:17 2016
DuplicateSignature:
package:
Processing triggers for man-db (2.7.5-1) ...
dpkg: error processing package libgs9-common (--configure):
package libgs9-common is already installed and configured
ErrorMessage: package libgs9:i386 is already installed and configured
InstallationDate: Installed on 2016-11-01 (36 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu-Studio 16.04.1 LTS "Xenial Xerus" - Release i386 (20160719)
Lpstat: Error: command ['lpstat', '-v'] failed with exit code 1: lpstat: No destinations added.
MachineType: System manufacturer System Product Name
Papersize: a4
ProcKernelCmdLine: BOOT_IMAGE=
RelatedPackageV
dpkg 1.18.4ubuntu1.1
apt 1.2.15
SourcePackage: dpkg
Title: package libgs9:i386 9.18~dfsg~
UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install)
dmi.bios.date: 10/08/2012
dmi.bios.vendor: American Megatrends Inc.
dmi.bios.version: 0802
dmi.board.
dmi.board.name: P8H61-M LX3 R2.0
dmi.board.vendor: ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC.
dmi.board.version: Rev X.0x
dmi.chassis.
dmi.chassis.type: 3
dmi.chassis.vendor: Chassis Manufacture
dmi.chassis.
dmi.modalias: dmi:bvnAmerican
dmi.product.name: System Product Name
dmi.product.
dmi.sys.vendor: System manufacturer
tags: | removed: need-duplicate-check |
information type: | Public → Private Security |
Thanks for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. We appreciate the difficulties you are facing, but this appears to be a "regular" (non-security) bug. I have unmarked it as a security issue since this bug does not show evidence of allowing attackers to cross privilege boundaries nor directly cause loss of data/privacy. Please feel free to report any other bugs you may find.