On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 21:08 +0100, Patrick Dupre wrote: > On Wed, 30 Sep 2009, Craig White wrote: > > > On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 18:16 +0100, Patrick Dupre wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> Trying to install mplayer I get the conflicting package: > >> > >> rpm -Uvh /tmp/faad2-libs-2.7-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm > >> warning: /tmp/faad2-libs-2.7-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 > >> signature: NOKEY, key ID 8fcff4da > >> Preparing... ########################################### > >> [100%] > >> file /usr/lib64/libfaad.so.2.0.0 from install of > >> faad2-libs-1:2.7-1.fc11.x86_64 conflicts with file from package > >> libfaad2-1:2.7-16.fc11.x86_6 > >> > >> rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libfaad.so.2.0.0 > >> libfaad2-2.7-16.fc11.x86_64 > >> > >> It seems that libfaad.so.2 be delivered by 2 different pacakges ! > >> Are they the same ? > >> Should I just use --nodeps ? > >> > > ---- > > if you have to ask, --nodeps is always a bad idea > > > > it seems you are trying to replace a newer libfaad2 with an older one > > > Thank. > > Do you mean that faad-libs is an older version than libfaad2 ? > If yes, why mplayer requires faad2-libs and not libfaad2 ? > (yum install mplayer from rpmfusion). > ---- # rpm -q --whatrequires faad2-libs ffmpeg-libs-0.5-2.fc11.i586 mplayer-1.0-0.109.20090329svn.fc11.i586 xmms-faad2-2.7-1.fc11.i586 faad2-devel-2.7-1.fc11.i586 I don't know where you got libfaad2-1.2.7-16 from but it seems to be a problem here. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
