Paul Howarth wrote:
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'm not an atrpms user myself. In fact I don't use any repos but [base], [updates-released] and my own personal repo. Not even fedora extras (at least not yet). So I've no particular axe to grind...
> 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?
The problem above is that the Fedora xorg packages don't build the library needed; the atrpms version do include that library. Seems a perfectly reasonable thing to do.
Why couldn't I upgrade an rpm with a non atrpms without dependency problems?
If the updated package doesn't include the library, whose fault is that? Not atrpms I'd say.
> Why should I have to
force an update to a newer non-atrpms package?
I have little sympathy for people that use --force or --nodeps without knowing exactly what they are doing. This particular case is very simple. The person is trying to use mplayer from atrpms, which requires the atrpms xorg packages because the standard Fedora xorg packages do not include everything needed (recall there have also been complaints about xeyes etc. missing from the Fedora xorg packages). Where's the problem here? If a subsequent upgrade of xorg is forced, and the updated package doesn't include the "missing" library, the atrpms mplayer will break. That's the fault of the person doing the --force, not atrpms.
Heck, it has been months since I used atrpms and I still run into problems with some packages and updates.
If you've been using --force, I'm not terribly surprised to hear this.
Paul.
