Re: Help revert from KDE4

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

 



Words by R. G. Newbury [Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 05:47:48PM -0400]:
> It is time for this thread to die! But no-one seems to have
> a wooden stake or a silver bullet!
>

Yes, but you're killing it with misinformation.

> I have collected a few comments below with my response:
>
> "But the updates in the stable updates you pointed to are NOT the ones which 
> caused that. Your KDE 4 must be coming from Rawhide (development) or 
> kde-redhat unstable."
>
> No longer true. Which is part of the fog which enveloped the start of this 
> thread. If you look at any of the update mirrors, such as
>   http://linux.nssl.noaa.gov/fedora/linux/updates/8/i386
> you will find kdebase4, kdelibs4 and kdebase-runtime (4.0.1...etc). I 
> suppose those *were* in dev, but are no longer (February 20th)
>

There is no KDE *Desktop* on 8. Those are just auxiliary and devel
packages, they don't conflict in any way with any instalation of KDE3
that you may have. Got it?

>
> "After a brief following of this thread, I am unable to see how this
> could happen. However, the yum logs could help us understand, and if
> necessary, avoid this in the future. Could you please post the last part
> of your yum log - ie the part from say the date before when you were
> adding the extra packages. This is found in /var/log/yum.log {or if it
> was rolled over recently in /var/log/yum-2008????.log
> Also, were any updates done using rpm directly ?"
>
> The yum logs are long gone. I nuked it and started again. But I do not now 
> need them to know what happened.
>

No, I think you do.

> "Well, I have kde4 too, but I had to take action to get it. I had to
> enable the development repo(s), and then I track rawhide until f9."
>
> That must have been prior to February 20. I did NOT have dev enabled. 
> FEDORA-UPDATES.REPO IS ENABLED BY DEFAULT (confirmed by a bare metal install 
> this morning).
>

Fedora updates is *NOT* fedora-development. Updates are, well, updates, to
the current stable fedora version, of course. And I guess it's a good
thing they are enabled. I like mine that way.

>
> "Okay, adding atrpms to the mix can surely complicate your life a bit.
> If you enable atrpms you can end up pulling in more than you want.
> I'd recommend disabling it by default and then selectively enabling it
> at the command line when you want to install a specific package from
> there."
>
> "Also note that you could easily install mplayer and all of its deps
> from livna (or atrpms - but don't try mixing the two without a lot of
> care)."
>
> As far as I am aware the repo mplayer rpms are not xvmc enabled (leastways, 
> they have never run with '-vo xvmc -vc ffmpegmc' (whatever) for me). And you 
> still need faac, faad, lame etc. *and their devel packages* to compile 
> mplayer. That is what I was trying to do. And that is ALL I was trying to 
> do.
>

Next try you should try to do what you try to do with your eyes opened.
It helps a lot, trust me.

>
> > > And I think I can still call 'stupid' on the maintainers.
>
> "No, you can't do that yet.  You've provided no evidence that they made
> any packaging mistakes that caused the mess you find yourself in."
>
> I think I can: on 2 points.
>

No you can't, what they do is unpayed work. You can critize in a
constructive way or you can try to help.

> ">>I'd recommend disabling it by defaultand then selectively enabling it
> > > at the command line when you want to install a specific package from
> > > there."
>
> "No, please don't. If you do that, then better don't use the repo at
> all. This practice leads to phantom bugs that people then consider
> being caused by ATrpms which is not correct."
>
> And I follow Axel's advice on this matter.
>
> SYNOPSIS:
>
> 1.      DANGER WARNING. Updates are not commutative nor reversible.
> 2       DANGER WARNING. The Updates repo is enabled by default.
> 3.      The kde4 rpms may be packaged improperly, such that not all are 
> installed.

Ok. I'm start to think that you have a severe understanding problem.
Which KDE4 rpms are you taking about and from which repo ? No need to
answer. No, really.

> Way back in the beginning someone noted that the fastest fix is a 
> re-install.
>

No, the fastest fix was, an it will always be, to restore from a backup.

> And that advice is, unfortunately, true!
>

No.

> Thanks for the memories...this thread is DEAD.
> Geoff
>

Yes, as dead as your capacity to grok anything at all.

-- 
Jose Celestino
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.msversus.org/     ; http://techp.org/petition/show/1
http://www.vinc17.org/noswpat.en.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
"If you would have your slaves remain docile, teach them hymns."
    -- Ed Weathers ("The Empty Box")


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

  Powered by Linux