Ubuntu 10.4 update manager problems

chzwhz, assuming we're still talking about Ubuntu, I had the same problem; to fix it, try adding sudo at the command line:

sudo apt-get update

then enter your pw as requested

that should get you past the lock file message, and it will update the package list

then open the update manager as described by zeio33 above; it will show available updates for your system, click to button to install them

I'm having the same problem as far as getting the "Failed to fetch http://archive.getdeb.net/ubuntu/dists/isadora-getdeb/apps/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found Some index files failed to download, they have been ignored, or old ones used instead." I've tried all the suggestions found here and still no luck, i even get the same message when trying to run through terminal. On trying the "apt-get update" it comes back saying "E: Could not open lock file /var/lib/apt/lists/lock - open (13: Permission denied) E: Unable to lock the list directory I'm somewhat new to using linux and am probably missing something stupid. Anyone out there have any suggestions?

I had the same problem. After digging around, the solution was just to go into Synaptic Package Manager (close update manager first) and hit the "Reload" button. Close Synaptic, then run the update manager again.

To all who responded to my "update manager" frustration - thanks again!

In the interim I experimented with openSUSE at a friend's suggestion, with other bad luck. So I zeroed the disk and reinstalled Ubuntu 10.4 to try "zeio33"s suggestion. This time the update manager did not give me the error message! Which probably means that the missing file was replaced. Does it happen often that the update manager says you need a file when it is missing from the source? There is certainly a "flaw" in the Ubuntu support - no one can expect a complex system itself like an OS to be free of flaws (this update was over 250 files!), but the support should do better, I would think. Meanwhile, though giving a conditional pass to Ubuntu due to ubiquity, I will carry the Diogenes lantern on the lookout for other options, at least for a while.

hi

i AM linux user and i am being using linux for more then 6 year now and tried on almost all the linux distro available and ubuntu is best desktop linux OS with thousands of software packages and weekly security update and thousands of different variants OS based on ubuntu. believe me pal its the best operating system you can have.

coming to your problem you would have easily find the solution for this problem if you have visited the ubuntu community.issue is when i clicked the link. file it is suppose to point is removed are updated to higher version "base-files_5.0.0ubuntu20.10.04.1_i386.deb" to "base-files_5.0.0ubuntu20.10.04.2_i386.deb" if you try this below link in the browser you will download http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/main/b/base-files/base-files_5.0.0ubuntu20.10.04.2_i386.deb just double click the file it will install and there you go. or open up the terminal and run "apt-get update" it will reload the new links and updated package list.then in the menu start system-->administration-->update manager and it will show you the update of software and security update just click "install updates" button to install the updates

I personally made the switch to Linux Mint version 9 on an XP-class machine and it has been a very pleasant surprise to me at how well it works for not only a casual user but also for a "power" user. The only issues I only ever run into is at work we have to through proxy servers and based on how the rules are written they have a PAC file but they also have a proxy port setup. Sometimes certain web apps can only be accessed inside the VPN assuming the PAC file is loaded. BUt, I don't foresee that as a problem for you.

I run Ubuntu 10.4 at home with no problems but to be candid, I spend so much more time at work that Linux Mint is really getting a workout with me and it's passing all the tests. :)

The IP is valid and reachable, (I just did a ping and a traceroute to determine that), however the deb file is not there, thus the error. It's not different than a 404 error on a webpage because while you can reach the website, the page there isn't found. Same deal here. You can reach the IP/site, just not the file/page there. This isn't a flaw or fault of the OS, rather it's just a simple case of a missing file in a repository, that's all it is.

Ubuntu support is there, just not in the same way it is for Windows. Since you are still looking for a distro, I would highly recommend Linux Mint (a Ubuntu-derivative), which uses differnet repositories and also has a very well-known support community.

A friend suggests downloading from an alternate mirror site. You can do that, but you want to make sure whatever repositories you add, can be trusted.

How do you find appropriate sites Some software authors have their own Launchpad PPA site, while others use their own website setup, but while these may be safe, you cannot trust them compared to the secure repoistories that Canonical uses.

and how do you integrate this choice into Ubuntu so that the end user doesn't have to be a geek to navigate the process?

System > Administration > Software Sources > (enter password) and edit your repositories via the Other Software tab and the ADD button. You'll also need to enter in the authentication key via the Authentication tab as well. I highly recommend using the command line method though because it adds the authentication key automatically for you.

For example: sudo add-apt-repository ppa:gdm2setup/gdm2setup

Remember, everything you do in the GUI is really just an interface for the command line method. Some things are really best done via the command line not only for speed, but because many options are not available via the GUI vs the CLUI.

But the question remains - why can't the built-in site be found? The site IS found, it's the FILE that is NOT found.

Why hard-wire the Ubuntu 10.4 to a specific download site?

It's not hard-wired per se, as you can add repositories, but why use repositories? For the sake of security. All software that comes installed in Ubuntu by default (as well as many others) can be downloaded via secure repositories. These are not just secure sites, but also each software in these sites has a development team, a package management team, which oversee the coding, packaging, the quality assurance of their software.

Shouldn't user be presented with a selection of mirrors instead? You can add other repositories, but you need to know which ones you are adding, why, and what the ramifications of doing so are or may be. If you go add some repositories for unstable/testing/developmental software and you integrate the software from those repositories into your system, your own system may become unstable.