Bricscad package breaks upgrade to Ubuntu Precise

Bricscad V11 package has wrong description containing empty lines (the license). This breaks dpkg when upgrading from Oneiric to Precise. Information about package is present in dpkg database even if bricsycad v11 was uninstalled. The solution is to uninstall bricscad v11 package and manually remove information about bricscad v11 package from files /var/lib/dpkg/status and /var/lib/dpkg/available.

This may apply to V12 packages as well, but I don't use it (on 64bit system it is nearly uninstallable, I hope that Bricsys will make 64bit version of Bricscad or valid deb package).

Comments

  • I can confirm this, since I have experienced the exact same broken dpkg issue.

    The v11 package will NOT install because of that missing description line.

    Can you post instructions on HOW to manually remove info about bricscad v11 from those files?  I can run dpkg and apt-get commands, but I don't know what I'm doing/looking for when this manual stuff needs to be done.

    Thanks for your assistance, in advance!

    -gint

  • Hello,

    the same problem was mentioned on our forum before:
    https://forum.bricsys.com/discussion/16420

    Spyros M. was so kind to describe the problem and a solution on his blog:
    http://linuxaideddesign.blogspot.com/2012/03/important-notice-for-bricscad-linux.html

    Rather than fixing the description field by adding missing dots (as described in the blog post), you can also make the description single-line.
    The description field of each bricscadv11 or bricscadv12 appearance in files /var/lib/dpkg/status and /var/lib/dpkg/available is to be 'fixed'.  Do not remove the description field altogether, since it is a mandatory field in a debian package.

    I regret the inconvenience.  We can't backward-fix our installers.  Even when installing a new package with fixed description, the old description remains on the system.

    Kind Regards
    Tijs

  • Got it.  My upgrade to 12.04 is complete.

    Thanks for all the blank lines of code, Bricscad!  :-)

    -g.
  • 2 Gint> I'm sorry that I did not respond, I didn't realized, that I must subscribe manually to a thread create by me (yes, I'am inexperienced user in this forum ;-).

    2 Tijs> I should read forum better before posting, next time ... This is a nasty bug and it is (or was, as you metioned in previous topic about it) a bug of dpkg as well. It should not allow to break its  database, even when it receives bad package.
This discussion has been closed.