[RESOLVED] Latest Liquorix requiring new libssl3 dependency I don't have.
wildstar84
Status: Interested
Joined: 31 May 2017
Posts: 45
Location: Texas
Reply Quote
"linux-headers-5.17.0-9.1-liquorix-amd64 : Depends: libssl3 (>= 3.0.0) but it is not installable"

I have libssl1.1 v1.1.1o-1, the latest available installed. Haven't had any trouble installing prev. recent Liquorix kernels. Any suggestions?

:: Code ::
System:
  Host: XXXXXX Kernel: 5.17.0-5.1-liquorix-amd64 x86_64 bits: 64
  Desktop: AfterStep 2.2.12
  Distro: antiX-16.2_x64-base Berta Cáceres 15 June 2017
Machine:
  Type: Laptop System: Hewlett-Packard product: HP EliteBook 8440p v: N/A
  serial: <superuser required>
  Mobo: Hewlett-Packard model: 172A v: KBC Version 30.31
  serial: <superuser required> BIOS: Hewlett-Packard v: 68CCU Ver. F.11
  date: 11/25/2010
Battery:
  ID-1: BAT0 charge: 46.9 Wh (89.0%) condition: 52.7/52.7 Wh (100.0%)
CPU:
  Info: Dual Core model: Intel Core i5 M 520 bits: 64 type: MT MCP cache:
  L2: 3 MiB
  Speed: 1679 MHz min/max: 1199/2400 MHz Core speeds (MHz): 1: 1679 2: 1238
  3: 2374 4: 1283
Graphics:
  Device-1: Intel Core Processor Integrated Graphics driver: i915 v: kernel
  Device-2: Chicony HP Webcam [2 MP Macro] type: USB driver: N/A
  Display: x11 server: X.Org 1.21.1.3 driver: loaded: intel resolution:
  1: 1600x900~60Hz 2: 1920x1080~60Hz
  OpenGL: renderer: Mesa DRI Intel HD Graphics (ILK) v: 2.1 Mesa 21.3.8
Audio:
  Device-1: Intel 5 Series/3400 Series High Definition Audio
  driver: snd_hda_intel
  Sound Server-1: ALSA v: k5.17.0-5.1-liquorix-amd64 running: yes
Network:
  Device-1: Intel 82577LM Gigabit Network driver: e1000e
  IF: eth0 state: up speed: 1000 Mbps duplex: full mac: b4:99:ba:e2:cb:7c
  Device-2: Intel Centrino Advanced-N 6200 driver: N/A
Drives:
  Local Storage: total: 931.51 GiB used: 156.46 GiB (16.8%)
  ID-1: /dev/sda vendor: HGST (Hitachi) model: HTS721010A9E630
  size: 931.51 GiB
Partition:
  ID-1: / size: 31.2 GiB used: 17.2 GiB (55.1%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/sda2
  ID-2: /home size: 841.99 GiB used: 135.89 GiB (16.1%) fs: ext4
  dev: /dev/sda7
  ID-3: /var size: 31.2 GiB used: 3.37 GiB (10.8%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/sda5
Swap:
  ID-1: swap-1 type: partition size: 9 GiB used: 0 KiB (0.0%) dev: /dev/sda6
Sensors:
  System Temperatures: cpu: 50.0 C mobo: 0.0 C
  Fan Speeds (RPM): N/A
Info:
  Processes: 150 Uptime: 2d 16h 51m Memory: 7.57 GiB used: 1.91 GiB (25.3%)
  Shell: Bash inxi: 3.3.06
Repos:
  No active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list
  Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/antix.list
  1: deb http://la.mxrepo.com/antix/bullseye/ bullseye main nosystemd nonfree
  Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/bullseye-backports.list
  1: deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-backports main contrib non-free
  Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/buster-backports.list
  1: deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free
  Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/debian-stable-updates.list
  1: deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main contrib non-free
  Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/debian.list
  1: deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free
  2: deb http://security.debian.org/ testing-security main contrib non-free
  No active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/mx.list
  No active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/onion.list
  Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/various.list
  1: deb http://liquorix.net/debian/ sid main

Back to top
techAdmin
Status: Site Admin
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 4071
Location: East Coast, West Coast? I know it's one of them.
Reply Quote
This must be the Debian testing based Antix.

:: Code ::
Repos:
  Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list
    1: deb http://mirrors.kernel.org/debian experimental main contrib non-free
    2: deb http://mirrors.kernel.org/debian unstable main contrib non-free
    3: deb http://mirrors.kernel.org/debian/ testing main non-free contrib
    4: deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security testing-security main contrib non-free
    5: deb https://liquorix.net/debian unstable main
    6: deb http://www.deb-multimedia.org/ testing main non-free

apt-cache policy libssl3
libssl3:
  Installed: (none)
  Candidate: 3.0.3-5
  Version table:
     3.0.3-5 300
        300 http://mirrors.kernel.org/debian unstable/main amd64 Packages


Not in Testing yet, that explains it. I'd say this is a packaging error since Testing should be supported, I'll let damentz know. You are using the sid liquorix but either need to add sid repos and pin your apt to use testing, or wait a bit until libssl3 enters testing.
Back to top
techAdmin
Status: Site Admin
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 4071
Location: East Coast, West Coast? I know it's one of them.
Reply Quote
:: Code ::
 1: deb http://liquorix.net/debian/ sid main


I checked with damentz, it looks like the problem here is that you should have used testing, not sid, so you want to update your sources file and change that, then run apt-get update, then you'll be grabbing the liquorix debian testing branch kernel, not the sid branch. I think I understood that right.

Not an issue with liquorix that is, it's just you using Liquorix sid repo on your testing branch based AntiX
Back to top
damentz
Status: Assistant
Joined: 09 Sep 2008
Posts: 970
Reply Quote
techAdmin is right here, Liquorix is built for all the major branches of Debian. If you install the wrong version, there's a non zero chance an unexplainable issue may occur, including dependency errors during install or outright failures during boot or runtime.

The install script on the front page does a good job identifying which branch you are. However, you upgraded to a different branch but never updated your /etc/os-release file, the wrong version will be installed at the time that you run the script.
Back to top
wildstar84
Status: Interested
Joined: 31 May 2017
Posts: 45
Location: Texas
Reply Quote
Thanks y'all for your quick help - this was indeed the pbm. I fixed by changing the Liquorix repo from "sid" to "testing", updated, and now I can install (update) Liquorix again!

I always wondered why this was "sid" (when my system is testing/bookworm and I have never used sid for anything else), but whenever I first added Liquorix years ago, that's what was somehow set and always worked. I assume that I just got lucky and that testing just happened to be close enough to sid to not differ in dependencies for Liquorix (until now)!

Anyway, thanks again, and you can mark this as RESOLVED!

Jim
Back to top
techAdmin
Status: Site Admin
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 4071
Location: East Coast, West Coast? I know it's one of them.
Reply Quote
damentz has a much more advanced and complicated development system now than he did back then, it's possible he only did sid since it was a pain to do different versions, now he has it all automated using real tools.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   

All times are GMT - 8 Hours