update-manager crashed with Depends in _show_transaction(): libsystemd-login0 (>= 186) but 204-0ubuntu9 is to be installed

Bug #1213598 reported by Raghav Sehgal
10
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
update-manager (Ubuntu)
New
Medium
Unassigned

Bug Description

don't know

ProblemType: Crash
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 13.10
Package: update-manager 1:0.190
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 3.8.0-27.40-generic 3.8.13.4
Uname: Linux 3.8.0-27-generic i686
ApportVersion: 2.12-0ubuntu3
Architecture: i386
CrashCounter: 1
Date: Sun Aug 18 14:42:38 2013
ExecutablePath: /usr/bin/update-manager
GsettingsChanges:
 b'com.ubuntu.update-manager' b'first-run' b'false'
 b'com.ubuntu.update-manager' b'launch-time' b'1376817006'
 b'com.ubuntu.update-manager' b'show-details' b'true'
 b'com.ubuntu.update-manager' b'window-width' b'484'
InstallationDate: Installed on 2012-09-10 (342 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS "Precise Pangolin" - Release i386 (20120423)
InterpreterPath: /usr/bin/python3.3
MarkForUpload: True
PackageArchitecture: all
ProcCmdline: /usr/bin/python3 /usr/bin/update-manager --no-update
ProcEnviron:
 LANGUAGE=en_US:en
 PATH=(custom, no user)
 XDG_RUNTIME_DIR=<set>
 LANG=en_US.UTF-8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
PythonArgs: ['/usr/bin/update-manager', '--no-update']
SourcePackage: update-manager
Title: update-manager crashed with Depends in _show_transaction(): libsystemd-login0 (>= 186) but 204-0ubuntu9 is to be installed
UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to saucy on 2013-08-17 (0 days ago)
UserGroups: adm cdrom dip lpadmin netdev plugdev sambashare sudo

Revision history for this message
Raghav Sehgal (raghavsehgal27) wrote :
tags: removed: need-duplicate-check
Changed in update-manager (Ubuntu):
importance: Undecided → Medium
Revision history for this message
Seth Arnold (seth-arnold) 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
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.