On 02/15/2018 01:43 PM, Stephen Morris wrote: > On 16/2/18 6:52 am, Rick Stevens wrote: >> On 02/14/2018 01:43 PM, Stephen Morris wrote: >>> On 14/2/18 10:05 am, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: >>>> On Wed, 2018-02-14 at 08:08 +1100, Stephen Morris wrote: >>>>> So from my perspective the vlc package you had problems with works >>>>> fine >>>>> on my system. >>>>> >>>>> The packages I have installed are: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> bash-4.4$ rpm -qa vlc* >>>>> vlc-core-3.0.0-25.20180109git0c462fc.fc27.x86_64 >>>>> vlc-3.0.0-25.20180109git0c462fc.fc27.x86_64 >>>> When using Negativo17 I never had a package called vlc, just vlc-core >>>> and vlc-extras. The /usr/bin/vlc binary came from vlc-core. On >>>> switching to RPMfusion I now have a package called vlc. So I wonder if >>>> your installation is in fact from Negativo17. >>> I am definitely using the negativo17 packages. As a test I uninstalled >>> the vlc and vlc-core packages via yumex, and issued the vlc command in a >>> shell which told me it couldn't be found. I then went back into Yumex >>> and did a search for vlc, in the list of packages returned it said that >>> the vlc, vlc-core and vlc-extras package were from fedora-multimedia >>> which is negativo17, it did not provide me with any reference to vlc in >>> rpmfusion. I then installed vlc, vlc-core and vlc-extras (I didn't have >>> this one previously), ran vlc from the shell, and it work as I >>> documented previously. I have also checked on the negativo17 physical >>> repository and negativo17 does actually provide packages vlc, vlc-core >>> and vlc-extras. Looking at the file list from vlc and vlc-core, the vlc >>> package may not need to be installed. The vcl package provides files in >>> /usr/bin of qvlc and svlc, where the vlc-core package provides files in >>> /usr/bin of cvlc, nvlc, rvlc, vlc and vlc-wrapper. I haven't yet tried >>> the vlc functionality after uninstalling all 3 packages and just >>> installing vlc-core and vlc-extras. >>> >>> I've also checked the physical rpmfusion repository and their free >>> repository also has packages vlc, vlc-core and vlc-extras, but they are >>> named differently to the negativo17 ones so there is no confusion as to >>> which is which. What I don't know yet is why a vlc search in Yumex >>> doesn't show me the rpmfusion ones? >> I don't use yumex, but dnfdragora displays them--provided the >> rpmfusion-free and rpmfusion-free-update repos are enabled. >>> Particularly given that dnf info >>> vlc >>> tells me the installed vlc package is from fedora-multimedia and there >>> is a vlc package available from rpmfusion-free-updates and there is a >>> source package available from fedora-multimedia-source, which is what >>> dnf told before I did the uninstall and re-install. >> My packages (as of this morning, using rpmfusion-*): >> >> [root@golem4 ~]# dnf list vlc* >> Last metadata expiration check: 0:19:21 ago on Thu 15 Feb 2018 11:22:18 >> AM PST. >> Installed Packages >> vlc.x86_64 3.0.0-1.fc27 >> @rpmfusion-free-updates >> vlc-core.x86_64 3.0.0-1.fc27 >> @rpmfusion-free-updates >> vlc-extras.x86_64 3.0.0-1.fc27 >> @rpmfusion-free-updates >> Available Packages >> vlc.i686 3.0.0-1.fc27 >> rpmfusion-free-updates >> vlc-core.i686 3.0.0-1.fc27 >> rpmfusion-free-updates >> vlc-devel.i686 3.0.0-1.fc27 >> rpmfusion-free-updates >> vlc-devel.x86_64 3.0.0-1.fc27 >> rpmfusion-free-updates > > Mine is as follows: > > dnf list vlc* > Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'fedora-games', disabling. > Last metadata expiration check: 4 days, 21:34:58 ago on Sun 11 Feb 2018 > 10:48:39 AEDT. > Installed Packages > vlc.x86_64 1:3.0.0-25.20180109git0c462fc.fc27 @fedora-multimedia > vlc-core.x86_64 1:3.0.0-25.20180109git0c462fc.fc27 @fedora-multimedia > vlc-extras.x86_64 1:3.0.0-25.20180109git0c462fc.fc27 @System > Available Packages > vlc.i686 3.0.0-0.48.git20180109.rc5.fc27 rpmfusion-free-updates > vlc.src 1:3.0.0-25.20180109git0c462fc.fc27 fedora-multimedia-source > vlc-core.i686 3.0.0-0.48.git20180109.rc5.fc27 rpmfusion-free-updates > vlc-debugsource.x86_64 1:3.0.0-25.20180109git0c462fc.fc27 fedora-multimedia > vlc-devel.i686 1:3.0.0-25.20180109git0c462fc.fc27 fedora-multimedia > vlc-devel.x86_64 1:3.0.0-25.20180109git0c462fc.fc27 fedora-multimedia > vlc-plugin-jack.x86_64 1:3.0.0-25.20180109git0c462fc.fc27 fedora-multimedia > > > This output surprises me. The rpmfusion repositories are enabled, but > Yumex does not show the rpmfusion vlc versions as being installed even > after using it to uninstall the fedora-multimedia versions. Huh? According to the above, you have the fedora-multimedia versions installed, not the rpmfusion-free versions (although it's saying that vlc-extras was installed from a local RPM file (the "@System" repo). > If I issue > command vlc in a shell it runs the fedora-multimedia application. If I > use Yumex to uninstall vlc and vlc-core, then issue the command vlc in a > shell, it tells me the command doesn't exist. If I then use Yumex to > install the fedora-multimedia versions again, I can run the command from > the shell again. My bad, I've just looked at the output again and > realized it's not telling me that vlc.i686 is installed, it's just > telling me its available. I don't understand why the output is saying > vlc-extras was @system installed when all 3 of those vlc packages were > installed at the same time via Yumex. Are you certain of that? I mean, it could be you installed vlc-extras from a local RPM, then attempting to reinstall it via yumex may result in a "already installed" error and the locally-installed version would continue to be shown. Either remove and reinstall all three via yumex or dnf or expect this sort of thing. Again, not using yumex, I can't speak to its behaviour. Is it possible that yumex is actually using packagekit backends as apper does? If so, perhaps packagekit has some cruft left over that's masking things. dnf is seeing the packages from rpmfusion-free as available. If yumex doesn't, then something's wrong with yumex's configs/database/whatever. I'd suggest you go with dnf and dnfdragora (if you need a GUI). I use dnf directly from the command line 99% of the time. I think of dnf and its kin as the "official" Fedora package management systems and stay away from apper, packagekit and yum/yumex/whatever--at least for what I stick my fingers on. If they use stuff beyond rpm behind the scenes, I don't know about it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx - - AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 22643734 Yahoo: origrps2 - - - - Silence! Or I shall replace you with a very small shell script! - - - The Wizard of OS - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
