On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 06:24:06PM +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> On 24/04/07, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 04:31:41PM +0100, Paul Smith wrote:
> >> On 4/24/07, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> I am having the following dependencies problem with ATRPMS update:
> >> >>
> >> >> «Transaction Check Error:
> >> >> file /usr/lib/libmp3lame.so.0.0.0 from install of
> >> >> libmp3lame0-3.97-15.fc6.at conflicts with file from package
> >> >> libmp3lame-3.96.1-4
> >> >>
> >> >> Error Summary»
> >> >>
> >> >> Any ideas?
> >
> >> >If not file a bug against bugzilla.atrpms.net with some more details
> >> >like yum config (or whatever devsolver sou used) and the full
> >> >interaction log, e..g both the command you used and all the output you
> >> >received, not only the summary.
> >>
> >> Ok, Axel. Maybe the following may be useful:
> >
> >Yes, it is, and it looks like "the other" package comes from
> >freshrpms <murmling some rant about repos dropping repotags>.
> >
> >So it's a compatibility bug between freshrpms and atrpms. Since both
> >share the same bugzilla even more so a reason to file a bug report.
> >
>
> Hi Axel, I may be wrong, but looking at this section of the OPs report:
>
> libmp3lame0-3.97-15.fc6.at conflicts with file from package
> libmp3lame-3.96.1-4
>
> it seems that the freshrpms package is called "libmp3lame0" and not
> "libmp3lame" - so I don't think it's a repo tagging issue - there's
> two differently named packages which contain the same file. No?
No, it's the other way around. libmp3lame-3.96.1-4 w/o a repotag is
from freshrpms, libmp3lame0-3.97-15.fc6.at with the repotag "at" is
from ATrpms.
There are two conventions for libs: Either use foo-lib(s) as a name,
which is in Fedora itself the most common, or use libfoo<major> which
is what ATrpms often uses to allow transparent transitions from one
<major> to the next [1]. But libfoo isn't really used if the upstream
source and main package are called foo.
[1] otherwise you need to do what Fedora Core and Extras painfully
does: when libfoo.so.N goes to libfoo.so.N+1 you need to rebuild
all dependent packages in one sweep, with the libfoo<major> packaging
naming you can do the transition at your very own pace.
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpuhXoFIRdTQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
