any life-threatening danger in upgrading my f11 box to rawhide?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Sun, 8 Nov 2009, Bruno Wolff III wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 14:33:52 -0800,
>   Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > don't think so, I wouldn't have expected this. not sure what the issue
> > is.
>
> yum is getting better at making the real problem stand out from all
> of the dependent problems. I think the latest version provides a
> list just before starting the update. You can also look at the first
> missing dependency reports.
>
> These problems can be caused by updates being later than rawhide
> versions (especially during a freeze), missing obsoletes (these
> should get reported as bugs) and stuff in externel (e.g. rpmfusion)
> reops not getting updated for new library versions.

  as a single example, my attempt to upgrade produced:

  --> Missing Dependency: libssl.so.8()(64bit) is needed by package
tigervnc-server-1.0.0-2.fc11.x86_64 (installed)

  if i read the situation correctly, openssl would be upgraded but
there *is* no newer version of tigervnc-server in rawhide, so the
current version would remain, with its dependency on the older (and
about to be replaced) version of openssl.  hence, the dependency
failure.  is that an accurate description of what is happening here?

rday

p.s. in fact, there is no package named "tigervnc-server" in f12 at
all, just tigervnc.

--

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                               Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

            Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry.

Web page:                                          http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================