package r-cran-fcalendar 220.10063-1 failed to install/upgrade:

[The Zedd]

during upgrade from 6.06 to 8.04

ProblemType: Package
Architecture: i386
Date: Sun Jul 13 10:41:48 2008
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 8.04
ErrorMessage:
 ErrorMessage: package r-cran-fcalendar is already installed and configured
NonfreeKernelModules: nvidia
Package: r-cran-fcalendar 220.10063-1
PackageArchitecture: all
SourcePackage: fcalendar
Title: package r-cran-fcalendar 220.10063-1 failed to install/upgrade:
Uname: Linux 2.6.24-19-386 i686

[Cesare Tirabassi (norsetto)]

All these dapper r-cran packages:

r-cran-fcalendar 220.10063-1
r-cran-fmultivar 220.10063-1 (bug 248152)
r-cran-fextremes 220.10063-1 (bug 248154)
r-cran-quadprog 1.4.7-2 (bug 248155)
r-cran-fportfolio 220.10063-1 (bug 248156)
r-cran-fbasics 220.10063-1 (bug 248162)
r-cran-acepack 1.3.2.2-1

fail postrm with ".: 197: Can't open /usr/lib/R/etc/ldpaths"

This also causes the following packages to fail installation (since they depend on the hardy versions of some of the above packages):

r-cran-fseries (bug 248157)
r-cran-fimport (bug 248158)
r-cran-ftrading (bug 248159)
r-cran-fassets (bug 248160)

I suspect this is linked to the fact that since r-base-core (2.4.0~rc20060926-1), /usr/lib/R/etc/ldpaths has been moved to /etc/R/ldpaths and a symlink left in /usr/lib/R/etc/.
Everything goes well until r-base-core is unpacked when the failures start to happen. I do not fully understand why though, after unpacking the symlink should be in place and the postrm scripts for those packages should not fail.

There is a similar issue reported in the debian bts (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=400726) for another r-cran package but unfortunately no answer from the maintainer.

I'm subscribing Dirk to this bug, I'd like to know if he stumbled in anything similar already in Debian.

[Cesare Tirabassi (norsetto)]

Looks like http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=410951#22 clarifies the problem as well as giving the solution.

[Cesare Tirabassi (norsetto)]

For the time being, as a workaround solution, can you try to launch the upgrade again?
Alternatively, you can try from a terminal with any of these commands:

sudo dpkg --configure -a
sudo apt-get dist-upgrade
sudo aptitude dist-upgrade

Please let us know if this permits you to configure correctly your system.

[Cesare Tirabassi (norsetto)]

MOTU-sru is subscribed to decide if this is sru-worthy.
We have 32 dapper packages which are potentially involved:

r-cran-abind
r-cran-acepack
r-cran-car
r-cran-cluster
r-cran-date
r-cran-design
r-cran-effects
r-cran-fbasics
r-cran-fcalendar
r-cran-fextremes
r-cran-fmultivar
r-cran-fportfolio
r-cran-gregmisc
r-cran-hdf5
r-cran-kernsmooth
r-cran-latticeextra
r-cran-lme4
r-cran-matrix
r-cran-misc3d
r-cran-multcomp
r-cran-mvtnorm
r-cran-nlme
r-cran-psy
r-cran-quadprog
r-cran-rgl
r-cran-rsprng
r-cran-sandwich
r-cran-snow
r-cran-statdataml
r-cran-strucchange
r-omegahat-ggobi
r-omegahat-rgtk

The ideal solution would be to implement a fix through hardy-update that would allow the installation to proceed without errors. This could be done either with a no-op postrm or moving the depends on r-base-core to a pre-depends.

However, the issue can easily be solved by the user by running the upgrade again (I tested this successfully on a dapper chroot).

[Luca Falavigna (dktrkranz)]

Will this SRU involve 32 source packages? Does fix from Debian 410951 solve this issue?

[Dirk Eddelbuettel (edd)]

On 6 August 2008 at 12:53, Luca Falavigna wrote:
| Will this SRU involve 32 source packages?

Impossible to say. Actually may be best. Worst-case is 32, yes.

| Does fix from Debian 410951 solve this issue?

Maybe. You'll need to test -- we don't usually have upgrades skipping several
releases. Also note that I wasn't the maintainer for #410952.

Dirk

| --
| package r-cran-fcalendar 220.10063-1 failed to install/upgrade:
| https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/248150
| You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
| of the bug.

--
Three out of two people have difficulties with fractions.

[Dirk Eddelbuettel (edd)]

On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 01:14:17PM -0000, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
> On 6 August 2008 at 12:53, Luca Falavigna wrote:
> | Will this SRU involve 32 source packages?
>
> Impossible to say. Actually may be best. Worst-case is 32, yes.

Sorry: "Actually may be best to test." is what I meant to write.

D.

>
> | Does fix from Debian 410951 solve this issue?
>
> Maybe. You'll need to test -- we don't usually have upgrades skipping several
> releases. Also note that I wasn't the maintainer for #410952.
>
> Dirk
>
> | --
> | package r-cran-fcalendar 220.10063-1 failed to install/upgrade:
> | https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/248150
> | You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> | of the bug.
>
> --
> Three out of two people have difficulties with fractions.
>
> --
> package r-cran-fcalendar 220.10063-1 failed to install/upgrade:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/248150
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.

--
Three out of two people have difficulties with fractions.

[Luca Falavigna (dktrkranz)]

After a quick discussion with Cesare on #ubuntu-motu, there isn't a easy way to determine which package are affected or not, nor a common test case to check a proposed update. I'd like to see more details before approving this SRU.