How do I resolve package conflicts between Ubuntu and GIMP?
In Ubuntu 18.04 (Cinnamon), the package cpp-7
depends precisely on version 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04
of package gcc-7-base
:
$ aptitude why gcc-7-base
i cpp-7 Depends gcc-7-base (= 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04)
Meanwhile, the package libgfortran4
depends precisely on version 7.3.0-16ubuntu3
of the same package gcc-7-base
:
$ apt-cache show libgfortran4
Package: libgfortran4
...
Depends: gcc-7-base (= 7.3.0-16ubuntu3), libc6 (>= 2.27), libgcc1, libquadmath0
and libgfortran4
won't install if I have the other version of the package already installed:
$ sudo apt-get install libgfortran4
...
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libgfortran4 : Depends: gcc-7-base (= 7.3.0-16ubuntu3) but 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 is to be installed
Depends: libquadmath0 but it is not going to be installed
cpp-7
is in the dependency graph of ubuntu-desktop
. libgfortran4
is in the dependency graph of gimp
. Doesn't this imply that no one can ever install GIMP from the repositories on Ubuntu 18.04? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I certainly can't.
To make the matter even more maddening, apt-cache showpkg
shows that the two different versions of gcc-7-base
come from the same repository and have the same MD5 hash:
$ apt-cache showpkg gcc-7-base
Package: gcc-7-base
Versions:
7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 (/var/lib/dpkg/status)
Description Language:
File: /var/lib/apt/lists/us.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_bionic_main_binary-amd64_Packages
MD5: b6e93638a6d08ea7a18929d7cf078e5d
...
7.3.0-16ubuntu3 (/var/lib/apt/lists/us.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_bionic_main_binary-amd64_Packages)
Description Language:
File: /var/lib/apt/lists/us.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_bionic_main_binary-amd64_Packages
MD5: b6e93638a6d08ea7a18929d7cf078e5d
meaning (again, correct me if I'm wrong) that they're the exact same code. So, there isn't an actual dependency conflict here, only one of labels.
How does this happen and how do I fix it? For example, is there a way for me to tell either cpp-7
or libgfortran4
that it's okay to accept the other version of gcc-7-base
, because it's the exact same code? Do I need to get the package maintainer(s) involved?
Edit: A few days ago I posted a question on this topic. The current question is the narrowed-down result of work I've done on it in the meantime.
Edit: These are my active sources:
$ grep -Ev '(^#|^ *$|deb-src)' /etc/apt/sources.list /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic main restricted
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic universe
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic multiverse
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb [arch=amd64] https://packages.microsoft.com/repos/vscode stable main
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/keybase.list:deb http://prerelease.keybase.io/deb stable main
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/keybase.list.save:deb http://prerelease.keybase.io/deb stable main
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/vscode.list~:deb [arch=amd64] http://packages.microsoft.com/repos/vscode stable main
There's a commented deb-src
for updates,
# deb-src http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic-updates main restricted
but nothing commented or uncommented for updates that's just deb
. Should I add a line
deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic-updates main restricted
?
Edit: Adding
deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic-updates main restricted
to my /etc/apt/sources.list
file, then $ sudo apt-get update
worked. GIMP installed as expected with $ sudo apt-get install gimp
. Thank you all!
18.04 package-management gcc gimp
add a comment |
In Ubuntu 18.04 (Cinnamon), the package cpp-7
depends precisely on version 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04
of package gcc-7-base
:
$ aptitude why gcc-7-base
i cpp-7 Depends gcc-7-base (= 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04)
Meanwhile, the package libgfortran4
depends precisely on version 7.3.0-16ubuntu3
of the same package gcc-7-base
:
$ apt-cache show libgfortran4
Package: libgfortran4
...
Depends: gcc-7-base (= 7.3.0-16ubuntu3), libc6 (>= 2.27), libgcc1, libquadmath0
and libgfortran4
won't install if I have the other version of the package already installed:
$ sudo apt-get install libgfortran4
...
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libgfortran4 : Depends: gcc-7-base (= 7.3.0-16ubuntu3) but 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 is to be installed
Depends: libquadmath0 but it is not going to be installed
cpp-7
is in the dependency graph of ubuntu-desktop
. libgfortran4
is in the dependency graph of gimp
. Doesn't this imply that no one can ever install GIMP from the repositories on Ubuntu 18.04? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I certainly can't.
To make the matter even more maddening, apt-cache showpkg
shows that the two different versions of gcc-7-base
come from the same repository and have the same MD5 hash:
$ apt-cache showpkg gcc-7-base
Package: gcc-7-base
Versions:
7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 (/var/lib/dpkg/status)
Description Language:
File: /var/lib/apt/lists/us.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_bionic_main_binary-amd64_Packages
MD5: b6e93638a6d08ea7a18929d7cf078e5d
...
7.3.0-16ubuntu3 (/var/lib/apt/lists/us.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_bionic_main_binary-amd64_Packages)
Description Language:
File: /var/lib/apt/lists/us.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_bionic_main_binary-amd64_Packages
MD5: b6e93638a6d08ea7a18929d7cf078e5d
meaning (again, correct me if I'm wrong) that they're the exact same code. So, there isn't an actual dependency conflict here, only one of labels.
How does this happen and how do I fix it? For example, is there a way for me to tell either cpp-7
or libgfortran4
that it's okay to accept the other version of gcc-7-base
, because it's the exact same code? Do I need to get the package maintainer(s) involved?
Edit: A few days ago I posted a question on this topic. The current question is the narrowed-down result of work I've done on it in the meantime.
Edit: These are my active sources:
$ grep -Ev '(^#|^ *$|deb-src)' /etc/apt/sources.list /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic main restricted
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic universe
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic multiverse
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb [arch=amd64] https://packages.microsoft.com/repos/vscode stable main
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/keybase.list:deb http://prerelease.keybase.io/deb stable main
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/keybase.list.save:deb http://prerelease.keybase.io/deb stable main
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/vscode.list~:deb [arch=amd64] http://packages.microsoft.com/repos/vscode stable main
There's a commented deb-src
for updates,
# deb-src http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic-updates main restricted
but nothing commented or uncommented for updates that's just deb
. Should I add a line
deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic-updates main restricted
?
Edit: Adding
deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic-updates main restricted
to my /etc/apt/sources.list
file, then $ sudo apt-get update
worked. GIMP installed as expected with $ sudo apt-get install gimp
. Thank you all!
18.04 package-management gcc gimp
1
I think this may solve your problem
– Gabriel Ziegler
Dec 2 '18 at 14:56
@DKBose Yes, I posted that one, too. I edited my question to reference it. Thanks.
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 14:56
1
@GabrielZiegler It does not, but thanks.aptitude
suggests downgrading a bunch of packages to 16.04 versions, which I think is an unreasonable solution that's bound to cause more problems than it solves, especially since there's apparently no actual conflict in the code of 18.04 package versions in this case.
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 14:59
2
I have cpp-7, gfortran, and gimp installed on 18.04 and I didn't jump through any hoops to do it. Something else must be going on.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:07
I run both Gimp 2.8.22 (from PPA) and 2.10.8 (flatpak) on 16.04 and neither requires libgfortran4.
– xenoid
Dec 2 '18 at 22:37
add a comment |
In Ubuntu 18.04 (Cinnamon), the package cpp-7
depends precisely on version 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04
of package gcc-7-base
:
$ aptitude why gcc-7-base
i cpp-7 Depends gcc-7-base (= 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04)
Meanwhile, the package libgfortran4
depends precisely on version 7.3.0-16ubuntu3
of the same package gcc-7-base
:
$ apt-cache show libgfortran4
Package: libgfortran4
...
Depends: gcc-7-base (= 7.3.0-16ubuntu3), libc6 (>= 2.27), libgcc1, libquadmath0
and libgfortran4
won't install if I have the other version of the package already installed:
$ sudo apt-get install libgfortran4
...
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libgfortran4 : Depends: gcc-7-base (= 7.3.0-16ubuntu3) but 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 is to be installed
Depends: libquadmath0 but it is not going to be installed
cpp-7
is in the dependency graph of ubuntu-desktop
. libgfortran4
is in the dependency graph of gimp
. Doesn't this imply that no one can ever install GIMP from the repositories on Ubuntu 18.04? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I certainly can't.
To make the matter even more maddening, apt-cache showpkg
shows that the two different versions of gcc-7-base
come from the same repository and have the same MD5 hash:
$ apt-cache showpkg gcc-7-base
Package: gcc-7-base
Versions:
7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 (/var/lib/dpkg/status)
Description Language:
File: /var/lib/apt/lists/us.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_bionic_main_binary-amd64_Packages
MD5: b6e93638a6d08ea7a18929d7cf078e5d
...
7.3.0-16ubuntu3 (/var/lib/apt/lists/us.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_bionic_main_binary-amd64_Packages)
Description Language:
File: /var/lib/apt/lists/us.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_bionic_main_binary-amd64_Packages
MD5: b6e93638a6d08ea7a18929d7cf078e5d
meaning (again, correct me if I'm wrong) that they're the exact same code. So, there isn't an actual dependency conflict here, only one of labels.
How does this happen and how do I fix it? For example, is there a way for me to tell either cpp-7
or libgfortran4
that it's okay to accept the other version of gcc-7-base
, because it's the exact same code? Do I need to get the package maintainer(s) involved?
Edit: A few days ago I posted a question on this topic. The current question is the narrowed-down result of work I've done on it in the meantime.
Edit: These are my active sources:
$ grep -Ev '(^#|^ *$|deb-src)' /etc/apt/sources.list /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic main restricted
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic universe
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic multiverse
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb [arch=amd64] https://packages.microsoft.com/repos/vscode stable main
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/keybase.list:deb http://prerelease.keybase.io/deb stable main
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/keybase.list.save:deb http://prerelease.keybase.io/deb stable main
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/vscode.list~:deb [arch=amd64] http://packages.microsoft.com/repos/vscode stable main
There's a commented deb-src
for updates,
# deb-src http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic-updates main restricted
but nothing commented or uncommented for updates that's just deb
. Should I add a line
deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic-updates main restricted
?
Edit: Adding
deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic-updates main restricted
to my /etc/apt/sources.list
file, then $ sudo apt-get update
worked. GIMP installed as expected with $ sudo apt-get install gimp
. Thank you all!
18.04 package-management gcc gimp
In Ubuntu 18.04 (Cinnamon), the package cpp-7
depends precisely on version 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04
of package gcc-7-base
:
$ aptitude why gcc-7-base
i cpp-7 Depends gcc-7-base (= 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04)
Meanwhile, the package libgfortran4
depends precisely on version 7.3.0-16ubuntu3
of the same package gcc-7-base
:
$ apt-cache show libgfortran4
Package: libgfortran4
...
Depends: gcc-7-base (= 7.3.0-16ubuntu3), libc6 (>= 2.27), libgcc1, libquadmath0
and libgfortran4
won't install if I have the other version of the package already installed:
$ sudo apt-get install libgfortran4
...
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libgfortran4 : Depends: gcc-7-base (= 7.3.0-16ubuntu3) but 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 is to be installed
Depends: libquadmath0 but it is not going to be installed
cpp-7
is in the dependency graph of ubuntu-desktop
. libgfortran4
is in the dependency graph of gimp
. Doesn't this imply that no one can ever install GIMP from the repositories on Ubuntu 18.04? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I certainly can't.
To make the matter even more maddening, apt-cache showpkg
shows that the two different versions of gcc-7-base
come from the same repository and have the same MD5 hash:
$ apt-cache showpkg gcc-7-base
Package: gcc-7-base
Versions:
7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 (/var/lib/dpkg/status)
Description Language:
File: /var/lib/apt/lists/us.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_bionic_main_binary-amd64_Packages
MD5: b6e93638a6d08ea7a18929d7cf078e5d
...
7.3.0-16ubuntu3 (/var/lib/apt/lists/us.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_bionic_main_binary-amd64_Packages)
Description Language:
File: /var/lib/apt/lists/us.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_bionic_main_binary-amd64_Packages
MD5: b6e93638a6d08ea7a18929d7cf078e5d
meaning (again, correct me if I'm wrong) that they're the exact same code. So, there isn't an actual dependency conflict here, only one of labels.
How does this happen and how do I fix it? For example, is there a way for me to tell either cpp-7
or libgfortran4
that it's okay to accept the other version of gcc-7-base
, because it's the exact same code? Do I need to get the package maintainer(s) involved?
Edit: A few days ago I posted a question on this topic. The current question is the narrowed-down result of work I've done on it in the meantime.
Edit: These are my active sources:
$ grep -Ev '(^#|^ *$|deb-src)' /etc/apt/sources.list /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic main restricted
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic universe
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic multiverse
/etc/apt/sources.list:deb [arch=amd64] https://packages.microsoft.com/repos/vscode stable main
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/keybase.list:deb http://prerelease.keybase.io/deb stable main
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/keybase.list.save:deb http://prerelease.keybase.io/deb stable main
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/vscode.list~:deb [arch=amd64] http://packages.microsoft.com/repos/vscode stable main
There's a commented deb-src
for updates,
# deb-src http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic-updates main restricted
but nothing commented or uncommented for updates that's just deb
. Should I add a line
deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic-updates main restricted
?
Edit: Adding
deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic-updates main restricted
to my /etc/apt/sources.list
file, then $ sudo apt-get update
worked. GIMP installed as expected with $ sudo apt-get install gimp
. Thank you all!
18.04 package-management gcc gimp
18.04 package-management gcc gimp
edited Dec 2 '18 at 16:46
asked Dec 2 '18 at 14:37
Darien Marks
696
696
1
I think this may solve your problem
– Gabriel Ziegler
Dec 2 '18 at 14:56
@DKBose Yes, I posted that one, too. I edited my question to reference it. Thanks.
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 14:56
1
@GabrielZiegler It does not, but thanks.aptitude
suggests downgrading a bunch of packages to 16.04 versions, which I think is an unreasonable solution that's bound to cause more problems than it solves, especially since there's apparently no actual conflict in the code of 18.04 package versions in this case.
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 14:59
2
I have cpp-7, gfortran, and gimp installed on 18.04 and I didn't jump through any hoops to do it. Something else must be going on.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:07
I run both Gimp 2.8.22 (from PPA) and 2.10.8 (flatpak) on 16.04 and neither requires libgfortran4.
– xenoid
Dec 2 '18 at 22:37
add a comment |
1
I think this may solve your problem
– Gabriel Ziegler
Dec 2 '18 at 14:56
@DKBose Yes, I posted that one, too. I edited my question to reference it. Thanks.
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 14:56
1
@GabrielZiegler It does not, but thanks.aptitude
suggests downgrading a bunch of packages to 16.04 versions, which I think is an unreasonable solution that's bound to cause more problems than it solves, especially since there's apparently no actual conflict in the code of 18.04 package versions in this case.
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 14:59
2
I have cpp-7, gfortran, and gimp installed on 18.04 and I didn't jump through any hoops to do it. Something else must be going on.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:07
I run both Gimp 2.8.22 (from PPA) and 2.10.8 (flatpak) on 16.04 and neither requires libgfortran4.
– xenoid
Dec 2 '18 at 22:37
1
1
I think this may solve your problem
– Gabriel Ziegler
Dec 2 '18 at 14:56
I think this may solve your problem
– Gabriel Ziegler
Dec 2 '18 at 14:56
@DKBose Yes, I posted that one, too. I edited my question to reference it. Thanks.
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 14:56
@DKBose Yes, I posted that one, too. I edited my question to reference it. Thanks.
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 14:56
1
1
@GabrielZiegler It does not, but thanks.
aptitude
suggests downgrading a bunch of packages to 16.04 versions, which I think is an unreasonable solution that's bound to cause more problems than it solves, especially since there's apparently no actual conflict in the code of 18.04 package versions in this case.– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 14:59
@GabrielZiegler It does not, but thanks.
aptitude
suggests downgrading a bunch of packages to 16.04 versions, which I think is an unreasonable solution that's bound to cause more problems than it solves, especially since there's apparently no actual conflict in the code of 18.04 package versions in this case.– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 14:59
2
2
I have cpp-7, gfortran, and gimp installed on 18.04 and I didn't jump through any hoops to do it. Something else must be going on.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:07
I have cpp-7, gfortran, and gimp installed on 18.04 and I didn't jump through any hoops to do it. Something else must be going on.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:07
I run both Gimp 2.8.22 (from PPA) and 2.10.8 (flatpak) on 16.04 and neither requires libgfortran4.
– xenoid
Dec 2 '18 at 22:37
I run both Gimp 2.8.22 (from PPA) and 2.10.8 (flatpak) on 16.04 and neither requires libgfortran4.
– xenoid
Dec 2 '18 at 22:37
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
This kind of issue is usually fixed by a simple apt update
.
Let's see why by querying the madison database for the available 18.04 versions of gcc-7-base
and libgfortran4
.
$ rmadison gcc-7-base
gcc-7-base | 7.3.0-16ubuntu3 | bionic | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
gcc-7-base | 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 | bionic-updates | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
$ rmadison libgfortran4
libgfortran4 | 7.3.0-16ubuntu3 | bionic | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
libgfortran4 | 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 | bionic-updates | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
You can see that libgfortran4
is the bionic (non-updates) version, and has the bionic (non-updates) dependency. gcc-7-base
, on the other hand uses the newer bionic-updates dependency.
There are two common reasons for this kind of de-sync between a base repository and it's corresponding -updates repository on a single system.
The user has recently disabled the -updates repository. Easy enough to check and fix in /etc/apt/sources.list or your Software and Sources control panel.
The user simply hasn't run
apt update
in a while to refresh (update) apt's local database of available packages from both sources. That's an easy fix, too.
Your file /etc/apt/sources.list should have some combination of mirrors and sources that adds up to:
deb [mirror URL] bionic main
deb [mirror URL] bionic-updates main
deb [mirror URL] bionic-security main
The optional universe
, multiverse
, and restricted
repos can be included on the same lines.
1
I'm pretty sure you've nailed it. In the linked question, the OP says "but the only "updates" repos in my /etc/apt/sources.list are commented out, and I've never knowingly had them enabled." Don't know why someone would comment out "updates" repo, but there you have it.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:21
@OrganicMarble What I meant was, I've never knowingly done anything to the "updates" repos at all. So, either it came commented out when I did a fresh install of 18.04 a few weeks ago, or it got commented out as an unexpected consequence of something else I did. Is it supposed to be enabled?
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 15:27
1
The default on my installs has always been to have the security and updates repos enabled, but Linux is so configurable I hate to say what is "supposed" to be.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:30
1
@DarienMarks if you want updates (most do, you do, it's the default), then go into the file (or control panel) and enable -updates and -security. Then run anapt update
. Guessing as to how or why -updates was disabled is just speculation, and seems rather wasted effort.
– user535733
Dec 2 '18 at 15:30
@OrganicMarble Follow-up question. My/etc/apt/sources.list
only has a main-repo "updates" listing that begins withdeb-src
, which in my understanding is for source files that I want to compile myself. Should there be one that starts with justdeb
, or is thedeb-src
one the one I want to uncomment?
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 15:39
|
show 3 more comments
Another option is to install the snap version of GIMP. I realize some folks don't like snaps, but this may be a more palatable solution for the casual Linux user.
sudo snap install gimp
add a comment |
In addition to the accepted answer: If you have only default sources enabled and the latest package list (apt update
) and still encounter such conflicts on basic packages like gimp, then report a bug. This is something, what should be fixed by the package maintainer and what probably is rather easy to fix for him. It also may affect more people than just you. Such bugs happen from time to time, but the maintainers need to know.
Of course you should make sure, that your configuration and package status is not the problem before, because if you e.g. have got gimp (or some of its dependencies) from a third-party repository, the ubuntu maintainers cannot help you.
The second paragraph is very very important. Ubuntu's Continuous Integration (CI) system weeds out almost all of these kinds of packaging mistakes before they reach the repos. So if you discover one, be really really sure it's not your setup before filing the bug.
– user535733
Dec 3 '18 at 15:45
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "89"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1097914%2fhow-do-i-resolve-package-conflicts-between-ubuntu-and-gimp%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
This kind of issue is usually fixed by a simple apt update
.
Let's see why by querying the madison database for the available 18.04 versions of gcc-7-base
and libgfortran4
.
$ rmadison gcc-7-base
gcc-7-base | 7.3.0-16ubuntu3 | bionic | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
gcc-7-base | 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 | bionic-updates | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
$ rmadison libgfortran4
libgfortran4 | 7.3.0-16ubuntu3 | bionic | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
libgfortran4 | 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 | bionic-updates | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
You can see that libgfortran4
is the bionic (non-updates) version, and has the bionic (non-updates) dependency. gcc-7-base
, on the other hand uses the newer bionic-updates dependency.
There are two common reasons for this kind of de-sync between a base repository and it's corresponding -updates repository on a single system.
The user has recently disabled the -updates repository. Easy enough to check and fix in /etc/apt/sources.list or your Software and Sources control panel.
The user simply hasn't run
apt update
in a while to refresh (update) apt's local database of available packages from both sources. That's an easy fix, too.
Your file /etc/apt/sources.list should have some combination of mirrors and sources that adds up to:
deb [mirror URL] bionic main
deb [mirror URL] bionic-updates main
deb [mirror URL] bionic-security main
The optional universe
, multiverse
, and restricted
repos can be included on the same lines.
1
I'm pretty sure you've nailed it. In the linked question, the OP says "but the only "updates" repos in my /etc/apt/sources.list are commented out, and I've never knowingly had them enabled." Don't know why someone would comment out "updates" repo, but there you have it.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:21
@OrganicMarble What I meant was, I've never knowingly done anything to the "updates" repos at all. So, either it came commented out when I did a fresh install of 18.04 a few weeks ago, or it got commented out as an unexpected consequence of something else I did. Is it supposed to be enabled?
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 15:27
1
The default on my installs has always been to have the security and updates repos enabled, but Linux is so configurable I hate to say what is "supposed" to be.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:30
1
@DarienMarks if you want updates (most do, you do, it's the default), then go into the file (or control panel) and enable -updates and -security. Then run anapt update
. Guessing as to how or why -updates was disabled is just speculation, and seems rather wasted effort.
– user535733
Dec 2 '18 at 15:30
@OrganicMarble Follow-up question. My/etc/apt/sources.list
only has a main-repo "updates" listing that begins withdeb-src
, which in my understanding is for source files that I want to compile myself. Should there be one that starts with justdeb
, or is thedeb-src
one the one I want to uncomment?
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 15:39
|
show 3 more comments
This kind of issue is usually fixed by a simple apt update
.
Let's see why by querying the madison database for the available 18.04 versions of gcc-7-base
and libgfortran4
.
$ rmadison gcc-7-base
gcc-7-base | 7.3.0-16ubuntu3 | bionic | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
gcc-7-base | 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 | bionic-updates | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
$ rmadison libgfortran4
libgfortran4 | 7.3.0-16ubuntu3 | bionic | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
libgfortran4 | 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 | bionic-updates | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
You can see that libgfortran4
is the bionic (non-updates) version, and has the bionic (non-updates) dependency. gcc-7-base
, on the other hand uses the newer bionic-updates dependency.
There are two common reasons for this kind of de-sync between a base repository and it's corresponding -updates repository on a single system.
The user has recently disabled the -updates repository. Easy enough to check and fix in /etc/apt/sources.list or your Software and Sources control panel.
The user simply hasn't run
apt update
in a while to refresh (update) apt's local database of available packages from both sources. That's an easy fix, too.
Your file /etc/apt/sources.list should have some combination of mirrors and sources that adds up to:
deb [mirror URL] bionic main
deb [mirror URL] bionic-updates main
deb [mirror URL] bionic-security main
The optional universe
, multiverse
, and restricted
repos can be included on the same lines.
1
I'm pretty sure you've nailed it. In the linked question, the OP says "but the only "updates" repos in my /etc/apt/sources.list are commented out, and I've never knowingly had them enabled." Don't know why someone would comment out "updates" repo, but there you have it.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:21
@OrganicMarble What I meant was, I've never knowingly done anything to the "updates" repos at all. So, either it came commented out when I did a fresh install of 18.04 a few weeks ago, or it got commented out as an unexpected consequence of something else I did. Is it supposed to be enabled?
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 15:27
1
The default on my installs has always been to have the security and updates repos enabled, but Linux is so configurable I hate to say what is "supposed" to be.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:30
1
@DarienMarks if you want updates (most do, you do, it's the default), then go into the file (or control panel) and enable -updates and -security. Then run anapt update
. Guessing as to how or why -updates was disabled is just speculation, and seems rather wasted effort.
– user535733
Dec 2 '18 at 15:30
@OrganicMarble Follow-up question. My/etc/apt/sources.list
only has a main-repo "updates" listing that begins withdeb-src
, which in my understanding is for source files that I want to compile myself. Should there be one that starts with justdeb
, or is thedeb-src
one the one I want to uncomment?
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 15:39
|
show 3 more comments
This kind of issue is usually fixed by a simple apt update
.
Let's see why by querying the madison database for the available 18.04 versions of gcc-7-base
and libgfortran4
.
$ rmadison gcc-7-base
gcc-7-base | 7.3.0-16ubuntu3 | bionic | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
gcc-7-base | 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 | bionic-updates | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
$ rmadison libgfortran4
libgfortran4 | 7.3.0-16ubuntu3 | bionic | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
libgfortran4 | 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 | bionic-updates | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
You can see that libgfortran4
is the bionic (non-updates) version, and has the bionic (non-updates) dependency. gcc-7-base
, on the other hand uses the newer bionic-updates dependency.
There are two common reasons for this kind of de-sync between a base repository and it's corresponding -updates repository on a single system.
The user has recently disabled the -updates repository. Easy enough to check and fix in /etc/apt/sources.list or your Software and Sources control panel.
The user simply hasn't run
apt update
in a while to refresh (update) apt's local database of available packages from both sources. That's an easy fix, too.
Your file /etc/apt/sources.list should have some combination of mirrors and sources that adds up to:
deb [mirror URL] bionic main
deb [mirror URL] bionic-updates main
deb [mirror URL] bionic-security main
The optional universe
, multiverse
, and restricted
repos can be included on the same lines.
This kind of issue is usually fixed by a simple apt update
.
Let's see why by querying the madison database for the available 18.04 versions of gcc-7-base
and libgfortran4
.
$ rmadison gcc-7-base
gcc-7-base | 7.3.0-16ubuntu3 | bionic | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
gcc-7-base | 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 | bionic-updates | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
$ rmadison libgfortran4
libgfortran4 | 7.3.0-16ubuntu3 | bionic | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
libgfortran4 | 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 | bionic-updates | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x
You can see that libgfortran4
is the bionic (non-updates) version, and has the bionic (non-updates) dependency. gcc-7-base
, on the other hand uses the newer bionic-updates dependency.
There are two common reasons for this kind of de-sync between a base repository and it's corresponding -updates repository on a single system.
The user has recently disabled the -updates repository. Easy enough to check and fix in /etc/apt/sources.list or your Software and Sources control panel.
The user simply hasn't run
apt update
in a while to refresh (update) apt's local database of available packages from both sources. That's an easy fix, too.
Your file /etc/apt/sources.list should have some combination of mirrors and sources that adds up to:
deb [mirror URL] bionic main
deb [mirror URL] bionic-updates main
deb [mirror URL] bionic-security main
The optional universe
, multiverse
, and restricted
repos can be included on the same lines.
edited Dec 2 '18 at 15:52
answered Dec 2 '18 at 15:17
user535733
7,71722942
7,71722942
1
I'm pretty sure you've nailed it. In the linked question, the OP says "but the only "updates" repos in my /etc/apt/sources.list are commented out, and I've never knowingly had them enabled." Don't know why someone would comment out "updates" repo, but there you have it.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:21
@OrganicMarble What I meant was, I've never knowingly done anything to the "updates" repos at all. So, either it came commented out when I did a fresh install of 18.04 a few weeks ago, or it got commented out as an unexpected consequence of something else I did. Is it supposed to be enabled?
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 15:27
1
The default on my installs has always been to have the security and updates repos enabled, but Linux is so configurable I hate to say what is "supposed" to be.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:30
1
@DarienMarks if you want updates (most do, you do, it's the default), then go into the file (or control panel) and enable -updates and -security. Then run anapt update
. Guessing as to how or why -updates was disabled is just speculation, and seems rather wasted effort.
– user535733
Dec 2 '18 at 15:30
@OrganicMarble Follow-up question. My/etc/apt/sources.list
only has a main-repo "updates" listing that begins withdeb-src
, which in my understanding is for source files that I want to compile myself. Should there be one that starts with justdeb
, or is thedeb-src
one the one I want to uncomment?
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 15:39
|
show 3 more comments
1
I'm pretty sure you've nailed it. In the linked question, the OP says "but the only "updates" repos in my /etc/apt/sources.list are commented out, and I've never knowingly had them enabled." Don't know why someone would comment out "updates" repo, but there you have it.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:21
@OrganicMarble What I meant was, I've never knowingly done anything to the "updates" repos at all. So, either it came commented out when I did a fresh install of 18.04 a few weeks ago, or it got commented out as an unexpected consequence of something else I did. Is it supposed to be enabled?
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 15:27
1
The default on my installs has always been to have the security and updates repos enabled, but Linux is so configurable I hate to say what is "supposed" to be.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:30
1
@DarienMarks if you want updates (most do, you do, it's the default), then go into the file (or control panel) and enable -updates and -security. Then run anapt update
. Guessing as to how or why -updates was disabled is just speculation, and seems rather wasted effort.
– user535733
Dec 2 '18 at 15:30
@OrganicMarble Follow-up question. My/etc/apt/sources.list
only has a main-repo "updates" listing that begins withdeb-src
, which in my understanding is for source files that I want to compile myself. Should there be one that starts with justdeb
, or is thedeb-src
one the one I want to uncomment?
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 15:39
1
1
I'm pretty sure you've nailed it. In the linked question, the OP says "but the only "updates" repos in my /etc/apt/sources.list are commented out, and I've never knowingly had them enabled." Don't know why someone would comment out "updates" repo, but there you have it.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:21
I'm pretty sure you've nailed it. In the linked question, the OP says "but the only "updates" repos in my /etc/apt/sources.list are commented out, and I've never knowingly had them enabled." Don't know why someone would comment out "updates" repo, but there you have it.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:21
@OrganicMarble What I meant was, I've never knowingly done anything to the "updates" repos at all. So, either it came commented out when I did a fresh install of 18.04 a few weeks ago, or it got commented out as an unexpected consequence of something else I did. Is it supposed to be enabled?
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 15:27
@OrganicMarble What I meant was, I've never knowingly done anything to the "updates" repos at all. So, either it came commented out when I did a fresh install of 18.04 a few weeks ago, or it got commented out as an unexpected consequence of something else I did. Is it supposed to be enabled?
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 15:27
1
1
The default on my installs has always been to have the security and updates repos enabled, but Linux is so configurable I hate to say what is "supposed" to be.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:30
The default on my installs has always been to have the security and updates repos enabled, but Linux is so configurable I hate to say what is "supposed" to be.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:30
1
1
@DarienMarks if you want updates (most do, you do, it's the default), then go into the file (or control panel) and enable -updates and -security. Then run an
apt update
. Guessing as to how or why -updates was disabled is just speculation, and seems rather wasted effort.– user535733
Dec 2 '18 at 15:30
@DarienMarks if you want updates (most do, you do, it's the default), then go into the file (or control panel) and enable -updates and -security. Then run an
apt update
. Guessing as to how or why -updates was disabled is just speculation, and seems rather wasted effort.– user535733
Dec 2 '18 at 15:30
@OrganicMarble Follow-up question. My
/etc/apt/sources.list
only has a main-repo "updates" listing that begins with deb-src
, which in my understanding is for source files that I want to compile myself. Should there be one that starts with just deb
, or is the deb-src
one the one I want to uncomment?– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 15:39
@OrganicMarble Follow-up question. My
/etc/apt/sources.list
only has a main-repo "updates" listing that begins with deb-src
, which in my understanding is for source files that I want to compile myself. Should there be one that starts with just deb
, or is the deb-src
one the one I want to uncomment?– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 15:39
|
show 3 more comments
Another option is to install the snap version of GIMP. I realize some folks don't like snaps, but this may be a more palatable solution for the casual Linux user.
sudo snap install gimp
add a comment |
Another option is to install the snap version of GIMP. I realize some folks don't like snaps, but this may be a more palatable solution for the casual Linux user.
sudo snap install gimp
add a comment |
Another option is to install the snap version of GIMP. I realize some folks don't like snaps, but this may be a more palatable solution for the casual Linux user.
sudo snap install gimp
Another option is to install the snap version of GIMP. I realize some folks don't like snaps, but this may be a more palatable solution for the casual Linux user.
sudo snap install gimp
edited Dec 3 '18 at 15:05
Baptiste Candellier
1734
1734
answered Dec 2 '18 at 15:46
rkeating
6941213
6941213
add a comment |
add a comment |
In addition to the accepted answer: If you have only default sources enabled and the latest package list (apt update
) and still encounter such conflicts on basic packages like gimp, then report a bug. This is something, what should be fixed by the package maintainer and what probably is rather easy to fix for him. It also may affect more people than just you. Such bugs happen from time to time, but the maintainers need to know.
Of course you should make sure, that your configuration and package status is not the problem before, because if you e.g. have got gimp (or some of its dependencies) from a third-party repository, the ubuntu maintainers cannot help you.
The second paragraph is very very important. Ubuntu's Continuous Integration (CI) system weeds out almost all of these kinds of packaging mistakes before they reach the repos. So if you discover one, be really really sure it's not your setup before filing the bug.
– user535733
Dec 3 '18 at 15:45
add a comment |
In addition to the accepted answer: If you have only default sources enabled and the latest package list (apt update
) and still encounter such conflicts on basic packages like gimp, then report a bug. This is something, what should be fixed by the package maintainer and what probably is rather easy to fix for him. It also may affect more people than just you. Such bugs happen from time to time, but the maintainers need to know.
Of course you should make sure, that your configuration and package status is not the problem before, because if you e.g. have got gimp (or some of its dependencies) from a third-party repository, the ubuntu maintainers cannot help you.
The second paragraph is very very important. Ubuntu's Continuous Integration (CI) system weeds out almost all of these kinds of packaging mistakes before they reach the repos. So if you discover one, be really really sure it's not your setup before filing the bug.
– user535733
Dec 3 '18 at 15:45
add a comment |
In addition to the accepted answer: If you have only default sources enabled and the latest package list (apt update
) and still encounter such conflicts on basic packages like gimp, then report a bug. This is something, what should be fixed by the package maintainer and what probably is rather easy to fix for him. It also may affect more people than just you. Such bugs happen from time to time, but the maintainers need to know.
Of course you should make sure, that your configuration and package status is not the problem before, because if you e.g. have got gimp (or some of its dependencies) from a third-party repository, the ubuntu maintainers cannot help you.
In addition to the accepted answer: If you have only default sources enabled and the latest package list (apt update
) and still encounter such conflicts on basic packages like gimp, then report a bug. This is something, what should be fixed by the package maintainer and what probably is rather easy to fix for him. It also may affect more people than just you. Such bugs happen from time to time, but the maintainers need to know.
Of course you should make sure, that your configuration and package status is not the problem before, because if you e.g. have got gimp (or some of its dependencies) from a third-party repository, the ubuntu maintainers cannot help you.
answered Dec 3 '18 at 9:14
allo
41917
41917
The second paragraph is very very important. Ubuntu's Continuous Integration (CI) system weeds out almost all of these kinds of packaging mistakes before they reach the repos. So if you discover one, be really really sure it's not your setup before filing the bug.
– user535733
Dec 3 '18 at 15:45
add a comment |
The second paragraph is very very important. Ubuntu's Continuous Integration (CI) system weeds out almost all of these kinds of packaging mistakes before they reach the repos. So if you discover one, be really really sure it's not your setup before filing the bug.
– user535733
Dec 3 '18 at 15:45
The second paragraph is very very important. Ubuntu's Continuous Integration (CI) system weeds out almost all of these kinds of packaging mistakes before they reach the repos. So if you discover one, be really really sure it's not your setup before filing the bug.
– user535733
Dec 3 '18 at 15:45
The second paragraph is very very important. Ubuntu's Continuous Integration (CI) system weeds out almost all of these kinds of packaging mistakes before they reach the repos. So if you discover one, be really really sure it's not your setup before filing the bug.
– user535733
Dec 3 '18 at 15:45
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Ask Ubuntu!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1097914%2fhow-do-i-resolve-package-conflicts-between-ubuntu-and-gimp%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
I think this may solve your problem
– Gabriel Ziegler
Dec 2 '18 at 14:56
@DKBose Yes, I posted that one, too. I edited my question to reference it. Thanks.
– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 14:56
1
@GabrielZiegler It does not, but thanks.
aptitude
suggests downgrading a bunch of packages to 16.04 versions, which I think is an unreasonable solution that's bound to cause more problems than it solves, especially since there's apparently no actual conflict in the code of 18.04 package versions in this case.– Darien Marks
Dec 2 '18 at 14:59
2
I have cpp-7, gfortran, and gimp installed on 18.04 and I didn't jump through any hoops to do it. Something else must be going on.
– Organic Marble
Dec 2 '18 at 15:07
I run both Gimp 2.8.22 (from PPA) and 2.10.8 (flatpak) on 16.04 and neither requires libgfortran4.
– xenoid
Dec 2 '18 at 22:37