-2

This question is an exact duplicate of:

This is the error I get when I input apt update

Err:1 http://archive.getdeb.net/ubuntu xenial-getdeb InRelease
 Could not connect to archive.getdeb.net:80 (144.76.200.19). - connect (111: Connection refused)
Hit:2 http://kali.mirror.globo.tech/kali kali-rolling InRelease
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree       
Reading state information... Done
643 packages can be upgraded. Run 'apt list --upgradable' to see them.
W: Failed to fetch http://archive.getdeb.net/ubuntu/dists/xenial-getdeb/InRelease  Could not connect to archive.getdeb.net:80 (144.76.200.19). - connect (111: Connection refused)
W: Some index files failed to download. They have been ignored, or old ones used instead.

Connection is fine, I can browse website, ping addresses, clone files. I get the same result with apt-get update been stuck on this for a while. I'm not sure if it has something to do with my proxy, cat /etc/apt/apt.conf returns nothing.

marked as duplicate by Sparhawk, αғsнιη, msp9011, Rui F Ribeiro, countermode Aug 30 '18 at 10:03

This question was marked as an exact duplicate of an existing question.

  • 1
    Get rid of the http://archive.getdeb.net/ubuntu xenial-getdeb repository. Kali is Debian-based, and you cannot use packages built for Ubuntu on Debian nor vice-versa. – dsstorefile1 Aug 30 '18 at 6:45
2

As mentioned in the comments, you should remove the http://archive.getdeb.net/ubuntu xenial-getdeb repository. For some reason your computer is unable to connect to it, but in any case, you shouldn’t mix repositories on Kali; as the documentation says,

Any additional repositories added to the Kali sources.list file will most likely BREAK YOUR KALI LINUX INSTALL.

  • 1
    I thought Kali was already broken as is. That phrase ought to be corrected "will likely BREAK it further" ;) – Rui F Ribeiro Aug 30 '18 at 7:51
  • 1
    “I thought Kali was already broken as is.” [citation needed] I’ve noticed you saying similar things in reaction to a number of posts recently, without explaining why — so it amounts to nothing better than FUD :-(. – Stephen Kitt Aug 30 '18 at 8:36
  • I substantiate it fairly well in my answer to the canonic question here unix.stackexchange.com/questions/399626/… and have also substantiated claims when talking to you also about they slapping together packages from random sources...Kali is a botched and rushed job, transferring the onus of supporting such a weak product to this group is unfair and honestly, I do not understand your comment as I think you know better. – Rui F Ribeiro Aug 30 '18 at 9:15
  • Point taken. I think Kali matches its specifications quite well, so it’s not really broken — it’s users’ expectations which are broken ;-). – Stephen Kitt Aug 30 '18 at 10:11
  • Both, Kali and the users, I think. It would be simpler if they only had the live version for hacking purposes. At the end of the day, they are partly creating those expectations. – Rui F Ribeiro Aug 30 '18 at 10:30

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.