Miscellaneous Operating Systems/Hardware

Error: Depency not satisfiable: libc6

pentium
Who joined Aug. 28, 2006, 5:29 p.m.
and authored 4266 notes

Wrote the following at May 19, 2007, 11:04 p.m...

After finally realizing that it was possible to run limewire off ubuntu I set out to download it and the required version of java. After about an hour of work (after about another hour of downloading from the extremely slow server which holds ubuntu's software) I finally got stumped on this error when I tried to use Package installer:

Code:

Error: Depency not satisfiable: libc6

I looked over it all and to my luck the dependancy tree is the most mysterious linux component when it comes to my little linux-newb mind. What's the missing factor and what can be done to fix it?

_________________
:Crimson:

<-------- A very happy forum member.

tillin9
Who joined March 31, 2007, 7:39 p.m.
and authored 591 notes

Wrote the following at May 19, 2007, 11:59 p.m...

You pretty much need libc6 to do anything, so my guess is its a version issue. Ubuntu is actually very bad about this, frequently updating their libc. I'm on Debian Etch and can't use packages compiled for newer Ubuntu setups because it was compiled against a slightly newer libc. To see what version you have use dpkg -l

Code:

tillin9@Shiva$ dpkg -l libc6

Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold

| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed

|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)

||/ Name                         Version                      Description

+++-============================-============================-========================================================================

ii  libc6                        2.3.6.ds1-13                 GNU C Library: Shared libraries

Then check the libc needed by the package. An apt-get update, apt-get libc6 might just update the package, but I'd apt-get dist-upgrade to make sure you don't cause any more dependency problems (libc should be backwards binary compatible, but sometime isn't).

Finally, assuming your connection isn't to blame, might I suggest using a different mirror in /etc/apt/sources.list? I'm sure you can find a list of mirrors on the Ubuntu website.

Hope this helps.

pentium
Who joined Aug. 28, 2006, 5:29 p.m.
and authored 4266 notes

Wrote the following at May 20, 2007, 12:04 a.m...

Code:

root@Ubuntu:/home/pentium# dpkg -l libc6

Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold

| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed

|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)

||/ Name           Version        Description

+++-==============-==============-============================================

ii  libc6          2.3.6-0ubuntu2 GNU C Library: Shared libraries and Timezone

^^My system.
There won't be a newer release of ubuntu for a few months and I really don't know if my system would handle it.

As for seing what version of libc6 is needed for limewire, I can't find the requirements anywhere.

_________________
:Crimson:

<-------- A very happy forum member.

tillin9
Who joined March 31, 2007, 7:39 p.m.
and authored 591 notes

Wrote the following at May 20, 2007, 12:10 a.m...

I downloaded the latest .deb of limewire and got this error message:

Code:

limewire-basic depends on libc6 (>= 2.4-1); however:

Version of libc6 on system is 2.3.6.ds1-13.

Libc on fiesty is http://packages.ubuntu.com/feisty/base/libc6 (2.5-0)

What version of Ubuntu are you running?
Also, Debian and Ubuntu are not static distributions. Apt-get update, apt-get dist-update will keep your (stable/ testing/ Ubuntu revision) but will update the packages that have changed.

EDIT: Looks like you're using Dapper? If so, you need to upgrade (or at least download the .deb of the newer libc (edgy has 2.4-1, so it should work)) to use that version of limewire.

SAQ
Who joined July 19, 2006, 7:37 a.m.
and authored 5749 notes

Wrote the following at May 20, 2007, 7:57 a.m...

Remember you can usually run ldd on the (ELF) binary and get an idea of what it needs.

Invaluable when you come across one of those sites who think that "Linux 2.6.14" is a sufficient descriptor of the system requirements :roll:

pentium
Who joined Aug. 28, 2006, 5:29 p.m.
and authored 4266 notes

Wrote the following at May 20, 2007, 11:50 a.m...

yes, tillin I am using ubuntu but I upgraded to 6.10 a few months back.

Your link is also dead.

_________________
:Crimson:

<-------- A very happy forum member.

tillin9
Who joined March 31, 2007, 7:39 p.m.
and authored 591 notes

Wrote the following at May 20, 2007, 3:37 p.m...

If you're on 6.10 (Edgy) but have not run apt-get update, apt-get dist-upgrade in awhile, doing so will fix your whole problem as Edgy is should have libc6 2.4-1. Both Debian and Ubuntu routinely compile packages, release them, then upgrade them within a distribution. Doing an apt-get dist-upgrade will not move you to fiesty. It will, however, have a lot of updates if you haven't done this in awhile. An apt-get update, apt-get install libc6 might have fewer packages. However, the bigger point is you should run apt-get update, apt-get dist-upgrade regularly (I script it via cron on my Debian stable servers) to get things like security updates.

As far as the link, it looks like Ubuntu's servers are getting hammered, the whole package search section is down. The google cache: http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:dr ... cd=6&gl=us also shows the individual package link is down. Maybe the package mirrors are down too?

porter
Who joined Nov. 1, 2006, 10:37 p.m.
and authored 2914 notes

Wrote the following at May 20, 2007, 3:39 p.m...

pentium wrote:

Your link is also dead.

So what's the difference between

Quote:

ERROR
The requested URL could not be retrieved

and

Quote:

Error: Depency not satisfiable: libc6

I abandoned Ubuntu and returned to Debian for these reasons.

_________________
Land of the Long White Cloud and no Software Patents.

pentium
Who joined Aug. 28, 2006, 5:29 p.m.
and authored 4266 notes

Wrote the following at May 20, 2007, 3:44 p.m...

Quote:

I abandoned Ubuntu and returned to Debian for these reasons.

I'm lazy.
I just got settled into ubuntu. I don't want to transition over yet.

EDIT:
Oh, and I use automatic updates.
Doing both apt-get and apt-get dist-upgrade give:

Code:

pentium@Ubuntu:~$ sudo apt-get update

Password:

Get:1 http://security.ubuntu.com dapper-security Release.gpg [191B]

Hit http://security.ubuntu.com dapper-security Release

Hit http://security.ubuntu.com dapper-security/main Packages

Hit http://security.ubuntu.com dapper-security/restricted Packages

Hit http://security.ubuntu.com dapper-security/main Sources

Hit http://security.ubuntu.com dapper-security/restricted Sources

Hit http://security.ubuntu.com dapper-security/multiverse Packages

Get:2 http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper Release.gpg [189B]

Get:3 http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper-updates Release.gpg [191B]

Hit http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper Release

Hit http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper-updates Release

Hit http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper/main Packages

Hit http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper/restricted Packages

Hit http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper/main Sources

Hit http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper/restricted Sources

Hit http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper/universe Packages

Hit http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper/universe Sources

Hit http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper/multiverse Packages

Hit http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper-updates/main Packages

Hit http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper-updates/restricted Packages

Hit http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper-updates/main Sources

Hit http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper-updates/restricted Sources

Hit http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com dapper-updates/multiverse Packages

Fetched 3B in 5s (1B/s)

Reading package lists... Done

pentium@Ubuntu:~$ sudo apt-get dist-upgrade

Reading package lists... Done

Building dependency tree... Done

Calculating upgrade... Done

0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.

Running the GTK update manager also finds no new updates at all for anything.

_________________
:Crimson:

<-------- A very happy forum member.

tillin9
Who joined March 31, 2007, 7:39 p.m.
and authored 591 notes

Wrote the following at May 20, 2007, 3:48 p.m...

As much as I'm a Debian fan myself (100+ machines running Debian, okay most are work boxes

) Debian Etch would have the same problem with Limewire. The Limewire devs used a very new libc. I only have 2.3.6, it needs 2.4-1. The testing (Lenny now), unstable, and experimental are actually all 2.3.6 also. There are some 2.5 libc6 packages in the works, but nothing on the mirrors.

My opinion is to wait for the Ubuntu servers. Using the Debian unstable package: http://packages.debian.org/unstable/libs/libc6 would also be a possibility (I've used Ubuntu packages on Debian before), but I would think twice if this is more than a test box.

EDIT: Yes, so you're on Dapper. You said above you were on Edgy (6.10). Dapper only has an older version of libc6. Sorry if any confusion was on my part.

You might want to swap dapper for edgy in your /etc/apt/sources.list, then run apt-get update, apt-get libc6 and see what other packages it wants to pull along if the Ubuntu mirrors seem to be responding better than their web page.

pentium
Who joined Aug. 28, 2006, 5:29 p.m.
and authored 4266 notes

Wrote the following at May 20, 2007, 6:57 p.m...

Quote:

You said above you were on Edgy (6.10)

Doh! My mistake.

Quote:

You might want to swap dapper for edgy in your /etc/apt/sources.list, then run apt-get update, apt-get libc6 and see what other packages it wants to pull along

??? I didn't get what you meant.

_________________
:Crimson:

<-------- A very happy forum member.

tillin9
Who joined March 31, 2007, 7:39 p.m.
and authored 591 notes

Wrote the following at May 20, 2007, 7:07 p.m...

Hey, no problem.

I'm on Debian Etch, but your /etc/apt/sources.list should look something like this:

Code:

tillin9@Shiva$ more /etc/apt/sources.list

deb http://ftp.debian.org/ etch main contrib non-free

deb http://mirrors.kernel.org/debian/ etch main contrib non-free

deb http://debian.lcs.mit.edu/debian/ etch main contrib non-free

deb http://security.debian.org/ etch/updates main

But with a dapper in there instead of etch as that is your release name. Your mirrors will also be different. Anyway... to change distributions you just substitute the release name in this file. For example if I wanted to move my machine to testing (Lenny) I would swap etch to lenny then run apt-get update. You would swap dapper with edgy. The nice thing about apt, is you don't have to upgrade the whole distribution. If you're on Debian stable, but really want something that's only in testing, you change your /etc/apt/sources.list file, apt-get update, apt-get install packagename (it will automatically install the updated dependencies), then swap it back and run apt-get update. Apt is smart enough to leave those updated packages alone when you run your automatic updates. Granted a mixed distribution is inherently less stable than a pure one, but the vast majority of the time it works. This is essentially the same thing as downloading and manually running dpkg -i on the Dapper or Fiesty libc6 package but allows you to get the package through the Ubuntu mirrors since the http site seems to be down.

pentium
Who joined Aug. 28, 2006, 5:29 p.m.
and authored 4266 notes

Wrote the following at May 20, 2007, 10:26 p.m...

So what yor are saying is that if I change...

Code:

deb http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ dapper main restricted

deb-src http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ dapper main restricted

deb http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ dapper-updates main restricted

deb-src http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ dapper-updates main restricted

deb http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ dapper universe

deb-src http://ca.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ dapper universe

deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu dapper-security main restricted

deb-src http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu dapper-security main restricted

...to the locations for edgy packages and then run update manager, I will upgrade the system to edgy?

_________________
:Crimson:

<-------- A very happy forum member.

Alver
Who joined Dec. 7, 2005, 4:46 p.m.
and authored 725 notes

Wrote the following at May 21, 2007, 3:58 a.m...

tillin9 wrote:

The Limewire devs used a very new libc. I only have 2.3.6, it needs 2.4-1. The testing (Lenny now), unstable, and experimental are actually all 2.3.6 also. There are some 2.5 libc6 packages in the works, but nothing on the mirrors.

*ahem*...

Code:

[alver@Dostoyevski ~]$ cat /etc/debian_version

lenny/sid

[alver@Dostoyevski ~]$ dpkg -l libc6

Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold

| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed

|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)

||/ Name                    Version                 Description

+++-=======================-=======================-==============================================================

ii  libc6                   2.5-7                   GNU C Library: Shared libraries

The main point still stands though. Stable releases do not upgrade versions. If you have a stable ubuntu you'll never see newer versions trickle in - only bugfixes to existing versions. If you want to keep up with the merry-go-round, you have to hop on and use a testing distribution...

_________________
while (!asleep()) sheep++;

tillin9
Who joined March 31, 2007, 7:39 p.m.
and authored 591 notes

Wrote the following at May 21, 2007, 5:53 a.m...

pentium wrote:

So what your are saying is that if I change the locations for edgy packages and then run update manager, I will upgrade the system to edgy?

Yes. If you were to change those to edgy, the run a full apt-get update, apt-get dist-upgrade you would update everything to edgy. However, if you just apt-get install libc6 you'll only upgrade libc6 and dependencies to the edgy versions. I'm not sure how good Ubuntu is about going from one whole release to another. I remember I had one of my home machines set to stable (instead of Woody, rather stupidly) and when Sarge became stable instead of Woody the automatic updates migrated the machines over to Sarge (since Sarge was now stable) without a single issue.

As far as libc-2.6-7 not being on the mirrors, these things are not static and when I wrote that it wasn't. My comment still stands that the Limewire devs probably shouldn't have used such a new version when a lot of users don't have it. Using a testing version where things break isn't necessarily the best solution.