On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:25:13 -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote: > With rawhide eventually "unplugged" an attempt to run 'yum update' > resulted in the following: > > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for gucharmap > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper >= 0.3.11 for gnome-user-docs > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper >= 0.1.4 for gnome-media > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for gnumeric > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for gconf-editor > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper >= 0.3.4 for gnucash-docs > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for gthumb > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for fast-user-switch-applet > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for ggv > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for gnome-utils > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for yelp > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for totem > Error: Unresolveable requirement /usr/bin/scrollkeeper-update for gtkam > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for gdm > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for gtk-doc > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for gnome-terminal > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for libgnomedb-devel > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for eog > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for rhythmbox > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper >= 0.1.4 for printman > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for gnome-pilot > Error: Unresolveable requirement scrollkeeper for libgnomedb > > and an update clearly bailed out leaving no further clues what > may be the problem; especially that scrollkeeper-0.3.14-11.fc7, > not that surprisingly, is present on the system. > > Only further detective work revealed that the above is a result > of a yum attempt to replace scrollkeeper.x86_64 with rarian.i386 > (although rarian.86_64 is also mentioned in a transaction too and > rarian.i386 is definitely not wanted). Excluding 'rarian' allowed > to proceed and I can deal with that issue later. > > I believe that this is one more example of a well known bogosity > but if another bugzilla report is desired I can add one. It is not just a multi-lib problem, but also affects plain i386. The Obsoletes/Provides in rarian and rarian-compat are not in the same package. -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
