dpkg regression --force-depends

I can confirm the problem. The patch attached should fix this.

Thank you for your report.

Of course you still need --force-depends to get it to work.

Raphaël Hertzog wrote on 2011-04-22: #2
Of course you still need --force-depends to get it to work.

I didn't use this option with 10.10. I only used --force-architecture.
 So you suggest to write "foreign-architecture i386" in /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg and to use sudo dpkg -i --force-depends rebuilt_common.deb ?

On Sun, 24 Apr 2011, Damien Laporte wrote:
> Raphaël Hertzog wrote on 2011-04-22: #2
> Of course you still need --force-depends to get it to work.
>
> I didn't use this option with 10.10. I only used --force-architecture.
> So you suggest to write "foreign-architecture i386" in /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg and to use sudo dpkg -i --force-depends rebuilt_common.deb ?

--force-* option should never be used in general, so the real fix is to
use multiarch, so yes put foreign-architecture i386 and either fix the dependent
package to set Multi-Arch: foreign if they are allowed fo fullfil foreign
dependencies or install the package of the corresponding architecture
to properly satisfy dependencies.

Unfortunately it's too late for natty to make any such changes.

Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer

Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English)
                      ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français)

But will your patch be incorporated in natty ?

On Mon, 25 Apr 2011, Damien Laporte wrote:
> But will your patch be incorporated in natty ?

I don't know, I don't have upload rights so it's not my
choice at all. Steve ?

Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer

Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English)
                      ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français)

On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 07:57:57AM -0000, Raphaël Hertzog wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2011, Damien Laporte wrote:
> > But will your patch be incorporated in natty ?

> I don't know, I don't have upload rights so it's not my
> choice at all. Steve ?

It will have to be done as an SRU rather than in natty proper, but I'll
prepare an upload, yes.

--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world

This bug was fixed in the package dpkg - 1.16.0~ubuntu8

---------------
dpkg (1.16.0~ubuntu8) oneiric; urgency=low

  * src/packages.c: fix use of --force-depends so that it works again for
    foreign arch packages. Thanks to Raphaël Hertzog for the fix.
    LP: #767634.
 -- Steve Langasek <email address hidden> Fri, 29 Apr 2011 19:07:24 -0700

Hi, I'm facing the same too (and I am certainly not the only one)
You say the bug is fixed and released. But, my system being up to date, my dpkg version is still 1.16.0~ubuntu7. Is there anything I should do to integrate the fix as, since I upgrade to 11.04, I cannot use my printer.
Or should I downgrade to 10.10 and wait until the release of oneiric ?

Jean, you can pick the fixed package in oneiric (11.10) or simply wait until Steve prepares an update for Natty (11.04).

Hi Raphaël,

I tried to pick the fixed package in oneiric like you adviced Jean because I have the same issue on my 11.04, but after getting the 64 bits deb of fixed dpkg, it refuses to launch because of broke dependances. Any advice ?

It seems that most affected by this bug are trying to install the Canon Pixma-series drivers. I've got mine working, and here's how I did it:

1. Add the line
deb http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu oneiric main
to your /etc/apt/sources.list

2. Run
sudo apt-get update
DO NOT APT-GET UPGRADE. I don't know what it'll do, but you may end up reverting a good chunk of your system's packages manually.

3. Run
Code:
sudo apt-get install dpkg
4. Go into Synaptic (System-Administration-Synaptic Package Manager), search for dpkg. Select dpkg.

5. Under "Package," choose "Lock Version."

6. Remove or comment out the oneiric line from your /etc/apt/sources.list

7. Run
sudo apt-get update
again.

8. In the install.sh script from the Canon drivers, change
dpkg -iG
to
dpkg -iG --force-all

Unpleasant side-effect: dpkg will detect those packages as broken, so update-manager tosses up errors once in a while. I'm willing to live with that if I can print.

Actually, don't do what I just said above. While it does work, it also really, really broke APT. Don't do it!

Hey Guys,
I've got a solution that's worked for me.. its a bit of hack but it's worked on my system and I don't think it will cause any instability for other packages, please let me know if any concerns. It's a modification of a method I saw on a fedora forum at some point...
The process I went through is as follows:

1) download Canon drivers from usual web site (.deb files)
2) extract tar to get the individual .deb packages (common and printer specific)
3) Rework the deb file so it thinks its a amd64 package
    a) go into the extracted directory, in my case /var/tmp/cnijfilter-mx860series-3.10-1-i386-deb/packages
    b) sudo dpkg-deb --extract cnijfilter-common_3.10-1_i386.deb ./tryit-common
        # this extracts the file system from the deb to the tryit-common folder
    c) change into the tryit-common folder
    d) sudo dpkg-deb --control ../cnijfilter-common_3.10-1_i386.deb
       # this extracts the control structure for the .deb file
    e ) sudo gedit DEBIAN/control
      # change the line that says Architecture : i386 to say Architecture : amd64, then save and exit
    f) cd..
        # change back into the packages directory
   g) sudo dpkg-deb --build tryit-common/
This last command should create a .deb file called try-common.deb - you can use any name for this...
the deb should then install without problems using the standard
sudo dpkg -i tryit-common.deb

Repeat the above process with the printer specific deb file... in my case the mx860 driver...
They both installed on my up to date natty intel 64 Acer aspire 5742g and the printer worked perfectely...
I've attached the drivers I created... i hope they're usefull...
Looking forward to the release of the fix in Natty though, so i don't have to hack around in terminal anymore...

Cheers,
Chris

and the mx860 specific one...

Has the fix been released yet Steve? I assume though if it was, you would have posted here about it....

Approve, please accept into natty-proposed.

Accepted dpkg into natty-proposed, the package will build now and be available in a few hours. Please test and give feedback here. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to enable and use -proposed. Thank you in advance!

Could some one of the users who've subscribed to this bug please test the dpkg package in natty-proposed, and confirm whether it fixes your issue?

Hello.

I had exactly the same problem that is described in this report.
After installing the dpkg package having the "proposed" deposit activated, everything worked perfectly, and I was able to install my Canon MP550 on my Ubuntu 11.04 AMD64

Many thanks!
APLC

thanks very much for confirming!

This bug was fixed in the package dpkg - 1.16.0~ubuntu7.1

---------------
dpkg (1.16.0~ubuntu7.1) natty-proposed; urgency=low

  * src/packages.c: fix use of --force-depends so that it works again for
    foreign arch packages. Thanks to Raphaël Hertzog for the fix.
    LP: #767634.
  * regenerate lib/dpkg/trigdeferred.c from lib/dpkg/trigdeferred.l in
    the source, to ensure we don't end up with breakage from an out-of-date
    intermediate file as happened in oneiric.

  [ Guillem Jover ]
  * d84b36a81088721b340e52664aa2c3379fea2a9a: be less strict in the face of
    unknown Priority: fields in /var/lib/dpkg/status, so dpkg doesn't fail
    to run on systems whose contents were previously permitted.
    LP: #773022.
 -- Steve Langasek <email address hidden> Sat, 25 Jun 2011 13:49:46 -0500

I'm having this problem in 11.10. Shouldn't the version of dpkg on my system have this bug fixed?

Excerpts from Avery's message of Tue Nov 22 23:59:31 UTC 2011:
> I'm having this problem in 11.10. Shouldn't the version of dpkg on my
> system have this bug fixed?
>

Yes it should be working in 11.10. Can you file a new bug, mentioning
this bug # in it, against dpkg? Also come back to this bug and mention
the new bug #, so we can investigate.

Please report it with

apport-bug dpkg

Thanks!