Synaptic on Debian 11.3 fails to install "kate"

[Richard Owlett]

I'm running Debian 11.3 with MATE desktop.
When I attempt to use Synaptic to install "kate" it responds:

> W: Failed to fetch http://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/p/pcre2/libpcre2-16-0_10.36-2_amd64.deb
> 404 Not Found [IP: 199.232.98.132 80]
>
> W: Failed to fetch http://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/v/vlc/vlc-data_3.0.16-1_all.deb
> 404 Not Found [IP: 199.232.98.132 80]
>
> W: Failed to fetch http://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/v/vlc/libvlccore9_3.0.16-1_amd64.deb
> 404 Not Found [IP: 199.232.98.132 80]
>
> W: Failed to fetch http://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/v/vlc/vlc-plugin-base_3.0.16-1_amd64.deb
> 404 Not Found [IP: 199.232.98.132 80]
>
> W: Failed to fetch http://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/v/vlc/vlc-plugin-video-output_3.0.16-1_amd64.deb
> 404 Not Found [IP: 199.232.98.132 80]
>
> W: Failed to fetch http://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/v/vlc/libvlc5_3.0.16-1_amd64.deb
> 404 Not Found [IP: 199.232.98.132 80]
>
> W: Failed to fetch http://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/h/http-parser/libhttp-parser2.9_2.9.4-4_amd64.deb
> 404 Not Found [IP: 199.232.98.132 80]
>
> W: Failed to fetch http://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/v/vlc/libvlc-bin_3.0.16-1_amd64.deb
> 404 Not Found [IP: 199.232.98.132 80]

Is this bug or operator error?
TIA

[Markus Schönhaber]

Am 07.12.22 um 15:07 schrieb Richard Owlett:

> I'm running Debian 11.3 with MATE desktop.
> When I attempt to use Synaptic to install "kate" it responds:

>> W: Failed to fetch http://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/p/pcre2/libpcre2-16-0_10.36-2_amd64.deb
>> 404 Not Found [IP: 199.232.98.132 80]

[...]

> Is this bug or operator error?

If
apt update
helps, then it's the latter.

--
Regards
mks

[Bret Busby]

Have you tried apt install ?

I recently installed a package using apt install,m that synaptic did not
find by searching.

..
Bret Busby
Armadale
West Australia
(UTC+0800)
..............

[Richard Owlett]

Been using Debian since days of Squeeze and never had the problem ;/
Your suggestion worked.

[Richard Owlett]

Markus' suggestion of "apt update" got here first.
It worked.
Thanks

[Markus Schönhaber]

07.12.22, 16:00 +0100, Richard Owlett:

If your package cache is stale, the package manager might try to fetch
package files which don't exist on the server (probably being replaced
by newer versions) anymore. It does that since it doesn't know they're
gone, because of the mismatch between the (stale) local cache and the
(changed) situation on the server.
Then, refreshing the cache (apt update / apt-get update) fixes that.

--
Regards
mks

[David Wright]

That would suggest that you don't install any security updates,
because these would need to be discovered by apt update before
apt upgrade would find them.

Cheers,
David.

[Andrew M.A. Cater]

On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 08:07:31AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
> I'm running Debian 11.3 with MATE desktop.
> When I attempt to use Synaptic to install "kate" it responds:
>

As suggested before, it is not a bad idea to keep up to date. The latest
version of Bullseye is 11.5 and 11.6 will be released over the weekend
of 17th December or so.

I would suggest strongly that you get yourself a DVD image and mount it
using apt-cdrom add to add it and then update from it if you don't want
to connect a particular machine to the 'Net.

Likewise, 9.13 is very definitely oldoldstable amd beyond normal security
support other than via ELTS. Bookworm will begin to freeze within a couple
of months on 12th January 2023 or so: at that point, the clock is very
definitely ticking for 9.13.

I do, however, appreciate that you have very particular personal requirements
so this is just the standard warning to keep up to date with bugfixes,
security patches, updates to and removals of packages in current distributions
- a patched machine is generally to your (and everyone else's) benefit since
we can more readily help you.

With every good wish, as ever,

Andy Cater

> > W: Failed to fetch http://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/p/pcre2/libpcre2-16-0_10.36-2_amd64.deb
> > 404 Not Found [IP: 199.232.98.132 80]
> >
>

[Bret Busby]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but, with the previous suggestion that
was made, regarding running apt update, it is my understanding, in
thinking about it further, after I had suggested running apt install,
that the correct, or, recommended procedure, before installing any
additional packages, is to always, first, run apt update, to ensure that
the cache is always updated, before attempting to either upgrade the
system, or, to install any additional packages, as a standard operating
procedure.

Could someone please confirm or correct this perception?

Thank you in anticipation.

[Charles Curley]

On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 02:08:09 +0800
Bret Busby <br...@busby.net> wrote:

> … it is my understanding, in

> thinking about it further, after I had suggested running apt install,
> that the correct, or, recommended procedure, before installing any
> additional packages, is to always, first, run apt update, to ensure
> that the cache is always updated, before attempting to either upgrade
> the system, or, to install any additional packages, as a standard
> operating procedure.
>
> Could someone please confirm or correct this perception?

A a general rule, confirm. It can't hurt (other than the time it takes)
and might help a lot. You should use the same tool to update that you
use to upgrade. E.g.:

apt update && apt upgrade

A daily cron job to do the update or daily auto upgrades should be
sufficient.

--
Does anybody read signatures any more?

https://charlescurley.com
https://charlescurley.com/blog/

[David Wright]

On Wed 07 Dec 2022 at 11:53:23 (-0700), Charles Curley wrote:

> On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 02:08:09 +0800 Bret Busby wrote:
>
> > … it is my understanding, in
> > thinking about it further, after I had suggested running apt install,
> > that the correct, or, recommended procedure, before installing any
> > additional packages, is to always, first, run apt update, to ensure
> > that the cache is always updated, before attempting to either upgrade
> > the system, or, to install any additional packages, as a standard
> > operating procedure.
> >
> > Could someone please confirm or correct this perception?
>
> A a general rule, confirm. It can't hurt (other than the time it takes)
> and might help a lot. You should use the same tool to update that you
> use to upgrade.

Does synaptic not use the same lists as APT? I thought it was
merely a frontend (some screens of which look very like the
pre-APT dselect from the last century).

> E.g.:
>
> apt update && apt upgrade
>
> A daily cron job to do the update or daily auto upgrades should be
> sufficient.

Bret Busby having earlier written:

> I recently installed a package using apt install,m that synaptic did not
> find by searching.

As a synaptic user at times, can I ask you whether synaptic
auto-updates the repository lists when you perform a search?
[I take it "m" is just a typo.]

Looking at the help files that synaptic presumably uses,
I would say that the labelling the Update button with
"Reload Package Information" makes it seem like a heavier
operation than it is (or ought to be). One might think
it's going to re-download all 152MB (Debian bullseye)
of the lists, whereas it's usually a fraction of that,
eg today:

Hit:1 http://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security InRelease
Hit:2 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease
Hit:3 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease

basically, nothing.

Cheers,
David.

[Charles Curley]

On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 13:16:58 -0600
David Wright <deb...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:

> > A a general rule, confirm. It can't hurt (other than the time it
> > takes) and might help a lot. You should use the same tool to update
> > that you use to upgrade.
>
> Does synaptic not use the same lists as APT? I thought it was
> merely a frontend (some screens of which look very like the
> pre-APT dselect from the last century).

If by lists you mean sources.list and sources.list.d/*, I believe so
(and have no evidence to the contrary).

As for synaptic being a front end, someone else will have to answer
that. I understand that apt and aptitude have different algorithms for
calculating upgrades and dependencies.

So it is quite possible I am being over-cautious here.

[David Wright]

On Wed 07 Dec 2022 at 15:32:04 (-0700), Charles Curley wrote:

> On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 13:16:58 -0600 David Wright wrote:
>
> > > A a general rule, confirm. It can't hurt (other than the time it
> > > takes) and might help a lot. You should use the same tool to update
> > > that you use to upgrade.
> >
> > Does synaptic not use the same lists as APT? I thought it was
> > merely a frontend (some screens of which look very like the
> > pre-APT dselect from the last century).
>
> If by lists you mean sources.list and sources.list.d/*, I believe so
> (and have no evidence to the contrary).

No, that list in under the user's control and there's no avoiding it;
I meant APT's lists in /var/lib/apt/lists/, written by apt update.

> As for synaptic being a front end, someone else will have to answer
> that. I understand that apt and aptitude have different algorithms for
> calculating upgrades and dependencies.
>
> So it is quite possible I am being over-cautious here.

Cheers,
David.