Re: Yum packages (again)

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

 



On Mon, 2008-02-25 at 14:19 +1000, Da Rock wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-02-24 at 23:01 -0500, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> > Da Rock wrote:
> > > Ok, I know a little of this has been covered before, but I have some new
> > > info after some exhaustive debugging.
> > > 
> > > After the feedback regarding the repo conflicts, I decided to resolve
> > > this once and for all. I uninstalled all mplayer, x264 and xine
> > > packages, and reinstalled only the livna versions.
> > > 
> > > This produced mixed results. Firstly, Yum reported the packages
> > > installed. When you go back and check what is installed (version, etc)
> > > it stated that the freshrpms versions were installed- but only some. So
> > > I ended up with some livna and some freshrpms, despite the fact that I
> > > selected only livna packages to be installed.
> > 
> > You may want to disable or remove the freshrpms and livna repo files
> > in /etc/yum.repos.d and then use yum list extras to find what packages
> > are still installed from either of those repositories.  Something
> > like:
> > 
> > yum --disablerepo livna --disablerepo freshrpms list extras
> > 
> > might help you locate the packages that are still installed from
> > either livna or freshrpms.
> > 
> > Once you clean everything up and only have one of those repositories
> > enabled, you should find that things work a bit smoother.  There are
> > sometimes still occasional hiccups, especially with packages that
> > extend things that are in Fedora, but nothing more than you see
> > occasionally even within the stock repos.
> > 
> > > So I put it to all- what the hell is going on here? Neither repo
> > > appears to be able to declare what the packages ACTUALLY provide,
> > > and Yum is getting very confused. So who's fault is it? Where does
> > > the responsibility lie?
> > 
> > The responsibility lies with each user/admin.  If you enable third
> > party repositories that conflict with each other, you are responsible
> > for cleaning it up.  It's a mess, for sure.  That's why it's not
> > recommended or supported.
> 
> I think you miss my point a little. This is a bug- but who do I report
> it to? Yum developers or the repos? Seeing as Yum is misreporting the
> packages it would seem that Yum is a problem and needs to be extended to
> resolve these issues.
> 
> Sure, as sysadmin I can get in and mess around fixing these problems
> manually, but if this is being misreported, then how well do you think
> updates are going to completed? Not to mention other less experienced
> users...
> 

Let me put it this way- libx264.so.56 is found at /usr/lib on my system.
So why doesn't Yum see that this library is installed? And why does it
see libx264.so.56 in the freshrpms package when it clearly isn't?


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

  Powered by Linux