Re: [lmi] Problem upgrading 'wine'

[Greg Chicares]

TL;DR: if the first compound command fails, use the second:
  apt-get upgrade && apt-get dist-upgrade
  apt-get dist-upgrade && apt-get upgrade
Thanks so much.

On 2019-01-24 00:58, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 16:30:23 +0000 Greg Chicares <address@hidden> wrote:
[...]
> GC> 
> ---------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<-------
> GC> #apt-get upgrade     
[...]
> GC> Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
> GC> requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
> GC> distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
> GC> or been moved out of Incoming.
> GC> The following information may help to resolve the situation:
> GC> 
> GC> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> GC>  wine : Depends: wine64 (>= 4.0~rc6-1) but 3.0.3-2 is to be installed or
> GC>                  wine32 (>= 4.0~rc6-1)
> GC> E: Broken packages
> GC> 
> --------->8-------->8-------->8-------->8-------->8-------->8-------->8-------
> 
>  So all I can say is that I've just updated my own Buster chroot using "apt
> update && apt full-upgrade" (which should be functionally equivalent to the
> apt-get commands above) without any problems. And wine did get updated to
> 4.0~rc6-1, here is "apt-cache policy wine" output before:
> 
> wine:
>   Installed: 3.0.2-3
>   Candidate: 4.0~rc6-1
>   Version table:
>      4.0~rc6-1 500
>         500 http://httpredir.debian.org/debian buster/main i386 Packages
>  *** 3.0.2-3 100
>         100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

That seems to match my current state almost exactly:

/[0]#apt-cache policy wine
wine:
  Installed: 3.0.3-2
  Candidate: 4.0~rc6-1
  Version table:
     4.0~rc6-1 500
        500 http://deb.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 Packages
        500 http://deb.debian.org/debian buster/main i386 Packages
 *** 3.0.3-2 100
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

It seems unimportant that our "installed" versions differ slightly:
  3.0.2-3 yours
  3.0.3-2 mine
and that we're using slightly different debian.org URLs.

> But, as indicated by "i386" above, this is a 32 bit chroot, so there is no
> wine64 there.

Multi-arch-ness certainly doesn't make my chroot easier to maintain.

> GC> My currently-installed version
> GC>   $wine --version
> GC>   wine-3.0.3 (Debian 3.0.3-2)
> GC> still works (lmi's msw GUI test still runs successfully), so the
> GC> "Broken packages" message would seem to refer to the new version 4,
> GC> and I'd be tempted to guess that this message:
> GC>   wine : Depends: wine64 (>= 4.0~rc6-1) but 3.0.3-2 is to be installed
> GC> means that apt-get thinks that the 'wine' package requires a new
> GC> 'wine64', but that the old 'wine64' is required for some other reason.
> 
>  Yes, this is absolutely correct. The trouble is that I don't see at all
> what could this reason be. What does "apt-cache policy wine64" tell you and

The output looks fine to me for both wine32 and wine64:

/[0]#apt-cache policy wine32
wine32:i386:
  Installed: 3.0.3-2
  Candidate: 4.0~rc6-1
  Version table:
     4.0~rc6-1 500
        500 http://deb.debian.org/debian buster/main i386 Packages
 *** 3.0.3-2 100
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
/[0]#apt-cache policy wine64
wine64:
  Installed: 3.0.3-2
  Candidate: 4.0~rc6-1
  Version table:
     4.0~rc6-1 500
        500 http://deb.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 Packages
 *** 3.0.3-2 100
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

> what happens when you explicitly try to install this package, i.e. "apt
> install wine64"?

I've always used 'apt-get' rather than 'apt', so I'll continue that
practice here for consistency (AIUI, there shouldn't be any real
difference). I'm surprised to see how much extra stuff this would
bring in, but then again a major-version upgrade to 'wine' could
very plausibly introduce this many new dependencies:

/[0]#apt-get install wine64
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree       
Reading state information... Done
The following additional packages will be installed:
  libc-bin libc-dev-bin libc6 libc6:i386 libc6-dev libc6-dev-i386 libc6-dev-x32 
libc6-i386
  libc6-x32 libgnutls30 libgnutls30:i386 libgsm1 libgsm1:i386 libhogweed4 
libhogweed4:i386
  libnettle6 libnettle6:i386 libsdl2-2.0-0 libsdl2-2.0-0:i386 libvkd3d1 
libvkd3d1:i386 libvulkan1
  libvulkan1:i386 libwayland-client0:i386 libwayland-cursor0:i386 
libwayland-egl1:i386 libwine
  libwine:i386 libxkbcommon0:i386 libxss1 libxss1:i386 wine wine32:i386
Suggested packages:
  glibc-doc libc-l10n locales glibc-doc:i386 libc-l10n:i386 locales:i386 
gnutls-bin
  gnutls-bin:i386 cups-bsd ttf-mscorefonts-installer cups-bsd:i386 
ttf-mscorefonts-installer:i386
  q4wine winbind winetricks playonlinux wine-binfmt dosbox 
wine32-preloader:i386 wine64-preloader
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  libsdl2-2.0-0 libsdl2-2.0-0:i386 libvkd3d1 libvkd3d1:i386 libvulkan1 
libvulkan1:i386
  libwayland-client0:i386 libwayland-cursor0:i386 libwayland-egl1:i386 
libxkbcommon0:i386 libxss1
  libxss1:i386
The following packages will be upgraded:
  libc-bin libc-dev-bin libc6 libc6:i386 libc6-dev libc6-dev-i386 libc6-dev-x32 
libc6-i386
  libc6-x32 libgnutls30 libgnutls30:i386 libgsm1 libgsm1:i386 libhogweed4 
libhogweed4:i386
  libnettle6 libnettle6:i386 libwine libwine:i386 wine wine32:i386 wine64
22 upgraded, 12 newly installed, 0 to remove and 343 not upgraded.
Need to get 74.1 MB of archives.
After this operation, 86.6 MB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n] n
Abort.

I decided not to let that command run before trying your first suggestion
below.

> GC> Anyway, what should I do now?
> 
>  I'm quite certain the problem shouldn't be impossible to fix, but it might
> take some time to find the real reason for it, so if you don't have
> anything important in this chroot and if your creation of it is automated
> (I believe you have scripts, or at least a sequence of commands, for
> creating it?), then it might be faster to indeed just create a new one.
> 
>  If you do want to fix it, I'd try, in order of difficulty:
> 
> 1. Run "apt full-upgrade" or "apt-get dist-upgrade" directly, i.e. let apt 
>    remove/add packages and not just upgrade them. Perhaps this is all you
>    need to make the update succeed.

That worked. As I've grown to expect, the first use of 'wine' leads to:

Could not load wine-gecko. HTML rendering will be disabled.
Could not load wine-gecko. HTML rendering will be disabled.
wine: configuration in '/home/greg/.wine' has been updated.

Thereafter, the automated GUI test succeeds, and a quick manual run of
lmi suggests that complete order has been restored to my universe.