package liblockfile1:amd64 1.09-6ubuntu1 failed to install/upgrade: package liblockfile1:amd64 is already installed and configured

Bug #1710403 reported by edwin anno
8
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
dpkg (Ubuntu)
New
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

i was trying to uninstall a package ,"desktop sharing ..." from the Ubuntu Software menu.. I have a recent history of my box being hacked.. Not sure exactly whats going on.. Have had to reinstall Ubuntu a few times latelty.. I am using 16.04lts

ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 16.04
Package: liblockfile1:amd64 1.09-6ubuntu1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 4.10.0-32.36~16.04.1-generic 4.10.17
Uname: Linux 4.10.0-32-generic x86_64
ApportVersion: 2.20.1-0ubuntu2.10
AptdaemonVersion: 1.1.1+bzr982-0ubuntu14
Architecture: amd64
Date: Sat Aug 12 14:20:13 2017
Dependencies:
 gcc-6-base 6.0.1-0ubuntu1
 libc6 2.23-0ubuntu9
 libgcc1 1:6.0.1-0ubuntu1
 liblockfile-bin 1.09-6ubuntu1
 multiarch-support 2.23-0ubuntu9
DuplicateSignature:
 package:liblockfile1:amd64:1.09-6ubuntu1
 Processing triggers for gconf2 (3.2.6-3ubuntu6) ...
 dpkg: error processing package fonts-lato (--configure):
  package fonts-lato is already installed and configured
ErrorMessage: package liblockfile1:amd64 is already installed and configured
InstallationDate: Installed on 2017-08-11 (0 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 16.04.2 LTS "Xenial Xerus" - Release amd64 (20170215.2)
RelatedPackageVersions:
 dpkg 1.18.4ubuntu1.2
 apt 1.2.24
SourcePackage: dpkg
Title: package liblockfile1:amd64 1.09-6ubuntu1 failed to install/upgrade: package liblockfile1:amd64 is already installed and configured
UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install)

Revision history for this message
edwin anno (caerus) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Marc Deslauriers (mdeslaur) wrote : Bug is not a security issue

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.

information type: Private Security → Public
tags: removed: need-duplicate-check
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.