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

Re: dependencies/conflicts on regular Fedora 10






--- On Tue, 3/3/09, Michael Schwendt <mschwendt gmail com> wrote:

> From: Michael Schwendt <mschwendt gmail com>
> Subject: Re: dependencies/conflicts on regular Fedora 10
> To: fedora-list redhat com
> Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2009, 9:07 AM
> On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:55:54 -0700, Phil wrote:
> 
> > This is supposed to happen.  yum is doing its job 
> > protecting you from making mistakes.  Furthermore,
> this OFTEN happens 
> > when mirrors are not in sync, which cannot be
> controlled.
> 
> That theory is broken. First of all, look at this:
> 
>  
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2008-11798
> 
> What is it? A pkg group update from _last year_ for:
>  
>   digikam, kipi-plugins, kphotoalbum, kdegraphics
> 
> It's the one that changed from libkipi.so.5 to 6 in
> kdegraphics
> while providing the corresponding rebuilds of
> digikam'n'others.
> 
> Now, Antonio's msg mentions a kernel from Nov 2008 and
> digikam from stock
> F10 (Oct 2008), so perhaps no updates have been applied at
> all due to
> unknown problems or misconfiguration. His truncated Yum
> output contains
> 
>   Missing Dependency: libkipi.so.5()(64bit) is needed by
> ...
> 
> What does that mean? Earlier in the Yum output one could
> have
> seen that Yum mentioned availability of some updates (!),
> including one
> for kdegraphics, the package that bumps libkipi to
> libkipi.so.6.
> 
> Back to your theory. A mirror would either have metadata
> about
> a package offering libkipi.so.6 or old/out-of-date
> metadata. If it
> knows about libkipi.so.6, however, it knows also about the
> related
> rebuilds, such as digikam and kipi-plugins. Why would it
> keep the
> old digikam* from F10 if the repo contains the
> FEDORA-2008-11798
> update?
> 
> > For this very reason, the yum plugin: skip-broken was
> written.
>       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Doubtful.
>  
> > But as you yourself admitted, trying again later, when
> either the mirror 
> > finished syncing, or you used a different mirror, all
> worked as you 
> > expected.
> 
> You might want to think about other scenarios where mirrors
> or multiple
> repos can get out-of-sync.
> 
> > If, after several days of broken dependencies, you
> should have done as 
> > the previous poster suggested and provided help to the
> maintainers, who 
> > may have actually messed up a package.  Hey, it does
> happen.
> 
> Well, it's not in the Fedora 10 broken deps report.
> 
> > So how do you tell whether it really is broken?  Wait
> and retry for a 
> > day or two.
> 
> No, examine the problem with a few repo queries to find out
> what
> exactly is wrong.
> 
> -- 


Actually, I had just gotten a home made machine for my classroom, installed Fedora 10 and ran yum update -y, and I encountered the error. Sorry for then noise.  Thank you Michael for your post, I let the machine update all the other packages. Then came back and applied the updates again and did not encounter the problem again :)

Regards,

Antonio


      


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