On Thu, 2005-06-23 at 08:09 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Thu, 2005-06-23 at 05:31 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > [...snip...] > > >> >what version of yum? > > >> > > >> yum-2.0.7-1.1 > > >> > > >> >what version of libxml2 and libxml2-python are installed? > > >> > > >> libxml2-python-2.6.16-2 > > >> libxml2-devel-2.6.10-1.1.fc2.nr > > >> libxml2-2.6.16-2 > > > > > >does it strike you as alarming that those 3 don't all match? > > > > No, the miss-match is in the devel file and shouldn't bother > > yum/python unless I start compileing them from scratch. > > I think what Seth may have been alluding to, although I certainly don't > mean to put words in his mouth, is that if these don't match, it's an > indicator that you may be using some incorrect methodologies while doing > all this rpm mixing and matching. IIRC, most people agree that > "--force" is bad, unless you *absolutely* know what you're doing. I > don't see how you could have ended up with such a mismatch, without > using either "--force," or a really poorly spec'd RPM from a > non-authoritative source. It would be pointless for me to continue > (thus betraying more ignorance on my part) given that Seth is already on > the thread. :-) Moving on... > > [...snip...] > > I just checked, I still have the FC2 iso's so I could burn another set > > and use those to recover to the FC2 release level of > > yum/python/libxml2. Humm, they can be mounted but I don't recall the > > syntax. It involves using the loop device I think... > > You're still thinking about this the wrong way. Rather than try and > haphazardly rescue a borked system which is preventing you from doing > meaningful troubleshooting, why not take this chance to install (*NOT* > upgrade to) FC4 instead? Given the pace of Fedora, you're more likely > to get help with any residual yum problems -- if indeed you have any > after installation, which I haven't -- if you're using the stuff that's > not a year old. :-) > > > >> There are pieces of python-1.5, 2.2, and 2.3 installed here. Its > > >> been that way since I upgraded RH7.3 to FC2. > > > > > >I'd like to show you to: > > >http://torrent.fedoraproject.org > > > > > >go download an install disk and fix your system. > > Disco! > > > So what rpms do I now need to either update the python stuffs to be > > compatible with this new libxml2 stuff, or to downgrade the libxml2 > > stuffs to regain python compatibility? > > > > I do have FC4 final downloaded and on cd's & ready to go, but after > > the debacle in getting FC2 to actually do work here, my first install > > of FC4 is going to be an upgrade on a sacrificial FC3T4 box, not on > > this, my 99% working box. Or are the rpms on the FC4 disks > > compatible with my version of rpm? Historically not... > > Argh! It seems you don't understand that upgrading any "test" version > to a final version is *NEVER* a recommended option. If it's a > sacrificial box, as you say, then do an installation *from scratch*, not > an upgrade. Once you have that done, and you see the results and like > them -- which I bet you will, since I'm using FC4 myself -- take Seth's > advice and *install* FC4 onto your "real" system. Not an upgrade, not a > mix-and-match of RPMs (especially since "--force" is not your friend), > but an actual installation. If, by some chance, you need help or advice > on that process, consult fedora-list since the developers on this list > are focused on discussing what's broken, working, or coming up next for > the latest and greatest Fedora stuff. > > Hopefully I haven't annoyed any of said developers by pitching in on > this thread; I just thought it would save them some time and energy they > could devote to cool Fedora bits. Not to sound sycophantic, but in case > any of them are still reading, FC4 rocks hard. And Seth, I used to be > an up2date die-hard, but I'm now a yum convert. The yum-utils are > superb; I can't wait for pup. ;-) Whoops, I hate to reply to myself, but I realized after replying that this was on fedora-legacy-list and not fedora-devel-list. (See earlier comment re: my ignorance, QED.) Bend the foregoing comments into shape appropriately. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
