[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Yet More Yum Woe



On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 22:03:20 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:

> On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 20:08:00 +0000 (UTC), Beartooth wrote:
	[...] 
> What do you get if you run
> 
>   rpm --query --whatprovides 'mono(gtk-sharp)'
> 
> and
> 
>   repoquery --whatprovides 'mono(gtk-sharp)'
> 
> ?
	The first tells me an rpm for gtk-sharp; the second just gives my 
root prompt back.

> 
> In case you don't have repoquery yet, you can find it in the "yum-utils"
> package.

	I tried "yum install yum-utils" -- it says I have it, and it's 
the latest.

> There has been a gtk-shark2 update recently, and it certainly provides
> these four things which are complained about.
> 
> "sysinfo" is not found in the Fedora package collection, however. I
> wonder whether that might be of importance. If you "rpm -e sysinfo" it
> and then try yum update again, any change?
> 
>> Complete!
>> (1, [u'Please report this error in http://yum.baseurl.org/report'])
>> 
>>         I haven't the faintest idea what that means; so I google the
>> error line.
>> 
>> 	It sends me to a wad of sites on Fedora-forum (which I never have
>> been able to use; but I see there are discussions back at least to
>> 2007).
>> 
>>         So I go to that yum site, and it wants me to register; I try.
>> 
>>         Three different browsers tell me its certificate is no good,
>>         and
>> urge me strongly not to go there.
> 
> Still you could choose to go there (and add an exception for the
> certificate). ;)

	I tried it, and the warnings got stronger; one (Galeon or 
Epiphany) assured me that no honest X,Y, or Z (which seemed to cover 99 
44/100% of the waterfront among them) would ever ask me to do that. 
That's when I quit and asked here instead. *Can* someone vouch for 
yum.baseurl.org -- including that nobody could be spoofing it??

	I'd've done it if it'd been a site I know; but it isn't.
  
	[....]
>> Transaction Summary
>> 
================================================================================
>> Install      0 Package(s)
>> Update       0 Package(s)
>> Remove      18 Package(s)
>> 
>>         Some of that looks very serious; I don't want to futz with
>>         things
>> named sysinfo nor gnome-desktop-*. (I might, but I once did try some
>> such thing, long ago, and it removed yum! I had one devil of a time
>> with that ...)

	Now, after Ron Siven's assurance here, I have removed "sysinfo" 
-- and everything seems fine. Some sort of orphan from an old install, 
maybe ....

> If it prints a list of what packages it will remove, it won't silently
> remove itself.

	Yes; many a time have I taken advantage of that.

> What makes "yum remove ..." dangerous is that other dependency chains
> are much longer and would lead to removing many more packages. Paying
> close attention to the printed list and the y/n safety check is very
> important.

	Yes!!

	Many many thanks!

-- 
Beartooth Staffwright, PhD, Neo-Redneck Linux Convert
Remember I know precious little of what I am talking about.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]