On Fri, 2012-04-20 at 15:34 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On Fri, 2012-04-20 at 13:42 -0300, Davi Garcia wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Thanks for all feedback! Sorry about post question to the wrong list > > and about my poor problem description. Let me try explain better: > > > > I never decided to install Samba or Samba4 in my workstation, these > > packages were installed by default. I know that I'm using F17 that is > > still in beta, but I didn't know that alpha packages were being pushed > > to that repository. My problem is basically that Yum is not able to > > upgrade my system without use "--skip-broken". > > > > Since Ed Greshko confirmed that is a known issue, I'll wait the fix. > > What is very confusing is why do we have alpha packages in a beta > > repo? > > > > Again, sorry about any inconvenience. > > > Yes, the problem here is that some samba4 packages were pushed to > updates-testing that are marked as Obsoleting or otherwise replacing > their samba 3.x counterpart. This is bad, and anyone hitting this issue > should be adding negative karma to the update (as I am about to do). Replying to myself, I see that a fixed package is already built and is pending the next push to the updates-testing repository. Relevant BZ: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=814451
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
