On 17/2/18 5:02 am, Rick Stevens wrote:
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.
Yumex is configured to display uninstalled packages in black and
installed packages in green, whereby vlc and vlc-core were displayed in
green and vlc-extras was displayed in black. When I uninstalled vlc and
vlc-core, then selected all 3 packages to install, yumex said it
successfully installed all 3.
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.
I'll check out dnfdragora, I didn't know it existed. When dnf was
introduced I didn't see any indications of an associated gui package,
and there were threads from other people asking about one but there
weren't any responses about a gui, so I assumed that the only solution
was to keep using yumex, even though both packages had different
configurations as to when the repositories needed to be refreshed.
regards,
Steve
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- 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
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
