On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 22:19 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:05:36 -0700, Rick Stevens wrote: > > > On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 21:59 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:37:40 -0700, Rick Stevens wrote: > > > > > > > Sorry, I just joined the list. While I did scan the archives, I didn't > > > > see any resolution to F8T3 yum update failures...specifically the one > > > > where kdegraphics and kdebase depend on libIlmImf.so.4. > > > > > > > > That file exists in both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on my system (Opteron) > > > > and I've done a forced update (rpm -Fvh --force --nodeps) for those two > > > > packages yet yum still won't complete the update. > > > > > > > > Any ideas? > > > > > > The "fix" you tried is completely incorrect. People around the world > > > propose such "forced updates" again and again, and it seems impossible > > > to stop them from doing so. :( So, takes this advice: Look at *all* > > > packages in the update transaction set, not just the packages that are > > > installed already. Yum complains about files that will be missing > > > *after* applying the updates. An updated package takes away the needed > > > library. It doesn't matter that the library, which is complained > > > about, is installed already. A new package replaces the file with a > > > newer library that is incompatible with other packages. In your case > > > it is the newer OpenEXR-libs package which is ABI-incompatible. Wait > > > for the rebuilds [of the KDE packages] to show up in your favourite > > > mirror of Fedora Development (aka rawhide). > > > > I'm aware of the dangers of a forced update, so that's not a problem. > > This is also an experimental hamster machine and a full reinstall is > > also no big deal should it be necessary. > > > > However, it is strange that yum would whine that a library that is > > already installed isn't available, and that kdebase and kdegraphics > > have this weird dependency when it is caused by OpenEXR-libs. > > > > But then again, yum has some peculiarities. > > No. It looks like my comment above is too difficult to understand in > its quickly-typed-in form. > > You simply misinterpret Yum's error message. > > Interpret it differently (i.e. correctly). > > Yum reports that "_after_ installing the updates, the needed libraries > would be missing". Really? That's interesting. Didn't know that before. The error message it spits out is sure-as-heck misleading then. I read it as "I can't update because thus-and-so _is_ broken" rather than "I can't update because the update _would_ break thus-and-so." > Once more, it does not matter that you have the library installed > already. An update package removes it, since it replaces it with the > incompatible version that breaks the requirements of the installed > packages. I grok that. > [To understand Yum's perspective, do "rpm -ql OpenEXR-libs" and > repeat that for the _new_ OpenEXR-libs package that is offered > as an update.] I see what you're saying and now that I know that yum is telling me what WOULD be wrong if it were to do its thing, it makes sense. I will, however, stick to my statement that the error message is misleading. Had it prefaced such musings with "Update would break dependency: blah-blah" or something along those lines, it would have kept me from making an idiot of myself here and getting you angry with me. Thanks for the explanation. It truly helps. :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - Rick Stevens, Principal Engineer rstevens@xxxxxxxxxxxx - - CDN Systems, Internap, Inc. http://www.internap.com - - - - Okay, who put a "stop payment" on my reality check? - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
