On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 6:30 AM, ken <gebser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Available Packages
> gmime.i386 2.2.25-1.el5
> epel
> gmime-devel.i386 2.2.25-1.el5
> epel
The newer version of gmime is coming from the epel repo, which doesn't
appear to package gmime-sharp.
> My email client wrapped the rightmost field of some of the output above,
> but it's still discernible that epel wants to update to a newer version
> of gmime, but (as you said) has no corresponding version of gmime-sharp.
> Conceivably, this could be the problem. The versions I have of gmime
> and gmime-sharp seem to be from a different repo:
I'm sure this is the problem.
> # rpm -qi gmime gmime-sharp|grep URL
> URL : http://spruce.sourceforge.net/gmime/
> URL : http://spruce.sourceforge.net/gmime/
The URL file generally just describes where the original source comes
from, not what repo is being used. A better indicator of repo would
be the Vendor, Packager, or Build Host fields.
> and so this might be a contributing issue. So I deleted these two
> packages (rpm -e ...) and then did "yum install" on them... which took
> them from the "extras" repo,
That is interesting. Did your yum install command specify to install
gmime-sharp?
> (So this wouldn't seem to be a case of conflicting repos.)
I'm quite sure this is a classic case of conflicting repos.
> Now, doing "yum update" again brought me back to the original problem.
> :( But at least we have more clarity to it: the extras repo doesn't
> have a version update to gmime-sharp, a dependency for the update of
> gmime.
And epel doesn't have the updated gmime-sharp to go with the updated
gmime and gmime-devel.
> So.. what's the next thing to do?
Either exclude gmime from the epel repo or ask epel to package gmime-sharp.
> Why does the extras repo not have it if it's a dependency?
Because the new version is not coming from the extras repo.
--
William Hooper
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
