Bob Marcan wrote:
Paul Howarth wrote:
$ rpm -qlp xorg-x11-libs-6.8.1-12.FC3.21_1.rhfc3.at.i386.rpm | grep libvia warning: xorg-x11-libs-6.8.1-12.FC3.21_1.rhfc3.at.i386.rpm: V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 66534c2b /usr/X11R6/lib/libviaXvMC.so.1 /usr/X11R6/lib/libviaXvMC.so.1.0
If you're not getting this package, perhaps you've configured yum not to update your xorg packages from atrpms, or perhaps you've picked up a later version from elsewhere?
Paul.
[encijan ~]$ rpm -q xorg-x11-libs xorg-x11-libs-6.8.1-12.FC3.21 from ftp://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/
xorg-x11-libs-6.8.1-12.FC3.21 should not be as recent as: xorg-x11-libs-6.8.1-12.FC3.21_1.rhfc3.at
so an atrpms user should be getting xorg-x11-libs-6.8.1-12.FC3.21_1.rhfc3.at as an upgrade, which contains the libviaXvMC.so.1 library that the OP (an atrpms user) was looking for.
The next thing will be a new kernel at atrpms? Mixing this repos are a mess.
Where's the mixing? Everything the OP needed was either an FC3 package or available at atrpms.
Paul.
I have said it in the past. I have had these little(?) issues with atrpms. I don't doubt that Axel is doing what he does for a reason but for me, atrpms has been a headache. Why does atrpms packages always require only atrpms packages to work? Why couldn't I upgrade an rpm with a non atrpms without dependency problems? Why should I have to force an update to a newer non-atrpms package?
Heck, it has been months since I used atrpms and I still run into problems with some packages and updates.
-- Robin Laing
