On Friday 18 January 2008 04:15, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On 18/01/2008, Nigel Henry <cave.dnb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Now I comment out freshrpms, and uncomment the livna repo. > > I've shown just recently that the x264 package from livna is seen as > "older than" the package from freshrpms despite offering a newer > snapshot of the library. In other words, the older software > libx264.so.55 will upgrade the newer software libx264.so.56 due to how > the packages are versioned. And of course the change in the library > version additionally breaks package dependencies: > > $ rpmdev-vercmp 0 0.0.0 0.3.20070529.fc7 0 0 0.10.20070819.lvn8 > 0:0.0.0-0.3.20070529.fc7 is newer > > That translates to > > Epoch: 0 > Version: 0.0.0 > Release: 0.3.20070529.fc7 > > compared with > > Epoch: 0 > Version: 0 > Release: 0.10.20070819.lvn8 > > and is like that because "0.0.0" is higher than "0" in RPM version > comparison. Even if both packages used "Version: 0", it would be > necessary to agree on a common "Release" scheme as the date of the > software here is very important. Alternatively, creating a separate > namespace for every library major version would have worked, too. Apologies Michael. I do remember you having discussed x264 on a previous post. I don't have a test install of F8 at the moment, but as a workaround for the x264 package problem, would this sort of thing (as below) work? Download x264 rpm from Livna, then install it using "rpm -Uvh --oldpackage <path to livna x264 package>" The question is, if the later, but seemingly earlier x264 package from Livna does install, is it likely to cause any problems with the vlc, and mplayer apps that have been installed from freshrpms? This is all a bit academic at the moment, but presuming that the livna version of x264 is now installed, and the freshrpms versions of vlc, and mplayer are still working. Now I comment out freshrpms repo in /etc/apt/sources.list, and uncomment the livna one (yet again). Then an apt-get update to refresh the package lists, followed by an apt-get dist-upgrade. In your experience, now that x264 is no longer a problem, should the apt-get dist-upgrade now run to completion, and replace freshrpms versions of vlc, and mplayer, etc, with the livna versions? I'm just looking at workarounds for conflicts with packages from different 3rd party repo's here, and it's all a bit academic, as it's clearly better to just stick with one 3rd party repo, thus avoiding any package conflicts. Nigel. btw: I'll look through my harddrives, and see which one of my earlier versions of fedora core I'm willing to let go. I don't like losing old friends, but for the sake of testing out what I've mentioned above, one of them is going into the bit bucket in the sky. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
