Re: More and more yum dependency problems

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

 



Jonathan Berry wrote:
On 8/2/05, Paul Howarth <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Harald Grossauer wrote:

You may be able to fix your mozilla issues by doing:
# curl --remote-name http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/4/i386/mozilla-1.7.10-1.5.1.i386.rpm
# yum localinstall mozilla-1.7.10-1.5.1.i386.rpm


Result:

Setting up Local Package Process
Examining mozilla-1.7.10-1.5.1.i386.rpm: mozilla - 37:1.7.10-1.5.1.i386
Marking mozilla-1.7.10-1.5.1.i386.rpm as an update to mozilla -
37:1.7.8-2.x86_64
Marking mozilla-1.7.10-1.5.1.i386.rpm as an update to mozilla -
37:1.7.8-2.i386
Resolving Dependencies
--> Populating transaction set with selected packages. Please wait.
---> Package mozilla.i386 37:1.7.10-1.5.1 set to be updated
--> Running transaction check
Setting up repositories
updates-released          100% |=========================|  951 B    00:00
extras                    100% |=========================| 1.1 kB    00:00
base                      100% |=========================| 1.1 kB    00:00
Reading repository metadata in from local files
primary.xml.gz            100% |=========================| 297 kB    00:00
updates-re: ################################################## 811/811
Added 122 new packages, deleted 0 old in 1.97 seconds
--> Processing Dependency: mozilla-nspr = 37:1.7.10-1.5.1 for package:
mozilla
--> Processing Dependency: mozilla-nss = 37:1.7.10-1.5.1 for package:
mozilla
--> Restarting Dependency Resolution with new changes.
--> Populating transaction set with selected packages. Please wait.
---> Package mozilla-nspr.x86_64 37:1.7.10-1.5.1 set to be updated
---> Package mozilla-nss.x86_64 37:1.7.10-1.5.1 set to be updated
--> Running transaction check

Dependencies Resolved

=============================================================================
Package                 Arch       Version          Repository        Size
=============================================================================
Updating:
mozilla                 i386       37:1.7.10-1.5.1
mozilla-1.7.10-1.5.1.i386.rpm   25 M
Updating for dependencies:
mozilla-nspr            x86_64     37:1.7.10-1.5.1  updates-released  126 k
mozilla-nss             x86_64     37:1.7.10-1.5.1  updates-released  787 k

Transaction Summary
=============================================================================
Install      0 Package(s)
Update       3 Package(s)
Remove       0 Package(s)
Total download size: 26 M
Is this ok [y/N]: y
Downloading Packages:
Running Transaction Test
Finished Transaction Test
Transaction Check Error:   file /usr/bin/mozilla from install of
mozilla-1.7.10-1.5.1 conflicts with file from package mozilla-1.7.8-2
 file /usr/share/man/man1/mozilla.1.gz from install of
mozilla-1.7.10-1.5.1 conflicts with file from package mozilla-1.7.8-2

This isn't working because it needs to update both i386 and x86_64
versions of mozilla at the same time. Did you bugzilla the fact that
there is no mozilla.i386 update in the x86_64 updates-released repo?


No, it's not working because programs are not packaged to be installed
for two different architectures at the same time.  Remember the issue
with updating perl on x86_64 a while back with FC3?  You can install
either the 32-bit (with some tricks) or 64-bit version, but not both
(using the official RPM packages, that is).
Note that I said "programs" above.  There are libraries and such that
can be installed for 32-bit and 64-bit at the same time and are meant
to have that capability.  The fact that there is no i386 mozilla
update is because there was no i386 package to begin with.  This is
not a bug.  The packages that are showing up with both 32-bit and
64-bit versions are libraries that some other (32-bit) programs use.

I think you *can* install i386 and x86_64 versions of just about anything at the same time, as long as they're the exact same epoch-version-release (not that it's a good idea). You're certainly right about there not having been a mozilla.i386 package in the FC4 to start with, which begs the question: how did the OP end up with mozilla.i386 on his system?

I'll go off and retract that bug report now...

Paul.


[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux