On Mon, 9 Nov 2009, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 14:24 -0500, Seth Vidal wrote: > > > I would interpret it as impossible to decipher w/o the complete > > output. Please file a bug about it and include the entire output - > > don't snip anything out. > > I think it's just that only trying to upgrade udev - as he's doing - > doesn't cause a newer bluez to be pulled in. I don't see why it > should, it doesn't make any sense for udev to have a dependency on > bluez. I don't think we exactly support 'yum upgrade > $SOME_REALLY_IMPORTANT_PACKAGE' from a Rawhide repo when you're > running a stable release. Even less so than we support 'yum > upgrade'. i'm tempted to agree, except that the error clearly shows that the new udev conflicts with an existing bluez file, so obviously there's *some* kind of inter-relationship there that doesn't seem to exist with the *newer* bluez packages. in any event, i just did # yum upgrade bluez\* and that did the trick -- i'm now in the midst of a 300+ package upgrade. but i BZed this anyway: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533925 someone else can decide if, somehow, udev and bluez need to learn how to play nice. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry. Web page: http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday ======================================================================== -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
