On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 6:23 AM Miroslav Suchý <msuchy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > But very likely you get some dependency problem now. In that case please report it against appropriate package. > Could you please confirm if these two issues should really be reported before I submit them to Bugzilla? Problem 3: package whois-mkpasswd-5.4.1-1.fc29.x86_64 requires whois-nls = 5.4.1-1.fc29, but none of the providers can be installed - whois-nls-5.4.1-1.fc29.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade repository - problem with installed package whois-mkpasswd-5.4.1-1.fc29.x86_64 Problem 4: package darktable-2.6.0-2.fc30.x86_64 requires libexiv2.so.26()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - problem with installed package darktable-2.6.0-2.fc29.x86_64 - exiv2-libs-0.26-12.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository - darktable-2.6.0-2.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository If that's the case, do I file the bug reports as Fedora 30 for whois and darktable components, respectively? Is it enough to just mention this output? The problems 1 and 2 not listed above are related to rpmfusion repos so I supposed I should ignore them for now. Best regards Diogo _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
