FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-08-2011, 07:51 AM
Michael Schwendt
 
Default F14 yum update conflict

On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 21:36:20 -0700, JD wrote:

> >> So stick to one third party repo instead of atleast stop using
> >> conflicting repos. Mplayer and vlc are both in RPM Fusion.
> > It seems the failure is to enable rpmfusion _after_ atrpms.
> >
> > Plus, it's a mistake to install atrpms' "libmad" explicitly instead of
> > letting Yum (or other depsolvers) pull in whatever provides the
> > libmad.so.0 library. At atrpms' it's the "libmad0" package.
> >
> > If one starts with rpmfusion, one gets libmad-0.15.1b-13.fc12, and
> > atrpms' libmad-0.15.1b-4.fc14 loses version comparison: 4< 13
> >
> > [On the contrary, if one starts with atrpms, dependencies on libmad.so.0
> > pull in the "libmad0" package, which conflicts with rpmfusion's libmad
> > pkg. atrpms' libmad package contains no important library.]
> >
> > At rpmfusion, nothing requires the "libmad" package name:
> >
> > $ repoquery --exactdeps --whatrequires libmad
> > libmad-0:0.15.1b-13.fc12.i586
> > libmad-devel-0:0.15.1b-13.fc12.i586
> >
> > So, if nothing at atrpms explicitly requires "libmad0" either, one can
> > stick to rpmfusion's libmad package without ever getting atrpms' libmad0
> > package. Anything that wants libmad.so.0 will be happy with whatever
> > provides that library.
>
> What you say does not make sense re libmad0. To wit:
>
> # rpm -q libmad0
> libmad0-0.15.1b-4.fc14.i686
> # rpm -e libmad0-0.15.1b-4.fc14.i686

Not what I've asked you to do: "rpm -e libmad"
What you tried to do is to erase a package that contains a needed
shared library. That won't work, of course.

> I did not manually and explicitly install libmad0.

No, but libmad.

> Yum resolved the dependencies of the packages you see above.

Then please show the results of

repoquery --exactdeps --whatrequires libmad

NOT libmad0 (!) and return to what I've written above. The theory is
that if you have just libmad0 and not libmad, you don't have get a conflict.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 04-08-2011, 08:05 AM
Manuel Escudero
 
Default F14 yum update conflict

2011/4/8 Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@gmail.com>


On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 21:36:20 -0700, JD wrote:



> >> So stick to one third party repo instead of atleast stop using

> >> conflicting repos. *Mplayer and vlc are both in RPM Fusion.

> > It seems the failure is to enable rpmfusion _after_ atrpms.

> >

> > Plus, it's a mistake to install atrpms' "libmad" explicitly instead of

> > letting Yum (or other depsolvers) pull in whatever provides the

> > libmad.so.0 library. At atrpms' it's the "libmad0" package.

> >

> > If one starts with rpmfusion, one gets libmad-0.15.1b-13.fc12, and

> > atrpms' libmad-0.15.1b-4.fc14 loses version comparison: 4< *13

> >

> > [On the contrary, if one starts with atrpms, dependencies on libmad.so.0

> > pull in the "libmad0" package, which conflicts with rpmfusion's libmad

> > pkg. atrpms' libmad package contains no important library.]

> >

> > At rpmfusion, nothing requires the "libmad" package name:

> >

> > * *$ repoquery --exactdeps --whatrequires libmad

> > * *libmad-0:0.15.1b-13.fc12.i586

> > * *libmad-devel-0:0.15.1b-13.fc12.i586

> >

> > So, if nothing at atrpms explicitly requires "libmad0" either, one can

> > stick to rpmfusion's libmad package without ever getting atrpms' libmad0

> > package. Anything that wants libmad.so.0 will be happy with whatever

> > provides that library.

>

> What you say does not make sense re libmad0. To wit:

>

> # rpm -q libmad0

> libmad0-0.15.1b-4.fc14.i686

> # rpm -e libmad0-0.15.1b-4.fc14.i686



Not what I've asked you to do: "rpm -e libmad"

What you tried to do is to erase a package that contains a needed

shared library. That won't work, of course.



> I did not manually and explicitly install libmad0.



No, but libmad.



> Yum resolved the dependencies of the packages you see above.



Then please show the results of



*repoquery --exactdeps --whatrequires libmad



NOT libmad0 (!) and return to what I've written above. The theory is

that if you have just libmad0 and not libmad, you don't have get a conflict.

--

users mailing list

users@lists.fedoraproject.org

To unsubscribe or change subscription options:

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines


Humm, Just did a quick reading...
You could try (As Root in terminal):
- *yum clean all
-*yum makecache


- yum -y update
Hope this helps...
Cheers!

--
<-Manuel Escudero->
Linux User #509052
@GWave: jmlevick@googlewave.com


@Blogger: http://www.blogxenode.tk/ (Xenode Systems Blog)
PGP/GnuPG: DAE3 82E9 D68E 7AE4 ED31* 1F8F 4AF4 D00C 50E7 ABC6



--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 04-08-2011, 08:49 AM
Michael Schwendt
 
Default F14 yum update conflict

On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 03:05:40 -0500, Manuel wrote:

> Humm, Just did a quick reading...
>
> You could try (As Root in terminal):
>
> - yum clean all
>
> - yum makecache
>
> - yum -y update
>
> Hope this helps...

No, it won't help. "clean all" kills more than necessary. You want to look
up the better options in the manual in the "CLEAN OPTIONS" section,
e.g. "clean metadata".

Refreshing repo metadata like that is not a solution here, however.

But to prove my theory:

$ sudo rpm -i http://dl.atrpms.net/all/atrpms-repo-14-4.fc14.i686pm
$ repoquery --exactdeps --whatrequires libmad
libmad-0:0.15.1b-13.fc12.i586
libmad-0:0.15.1b-4.fc14.i686
libmad-devel-0:0.15.1b-13.fc12.i586

$ repoquery --exactdeps --whatrequires libmad0
libmad0-0:0.15.1b-4.fc14.i686
libmad-0:0.15.1b-4.fc14.i686
libmad-devel-0:0.15.1b-4.fc14.i686

One can keep _either_ libmad0 from atrpms _or_ libmad from rpmfusion
to avoid the conflict. Those are the packages that contain the shared
lib (libmad.so.0). Ignore libmad from atrpms, for the reasons explained
before.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 04-08-2011, 04:12 PM
JD
 
Default F14 yum update conflict

On 04/08/2011 12:51 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> repoquery --exactdeps --whatrequires libmad
>
I see! OK. You're right!

--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 04-08-2011, 04:14 PM
JD
 
Default F14 yum update conflict

On 04/08/2011 01:05 AM, Manuel Escudero wrote:
>
>
> 2011/4/8 Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@gmail.com
> <mailto:mschwendt@gmail.com>>
>
> On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 21:36:20 -0700, JD wrote:
>
> > >> So stick to one third party repo instead of atleast stop using
> > >> conflicting repos. Mplayer and vlc are both in RPM Fusion.
> > > It seems the failure is to enable rpmfusion _after_ atrpms.
> > >
> > > Plus, it's a mistake to install atrpms' "libmad" explicitly
> instead of
> > > letting Yum (or other depsolvers) pull in whatever provides the
> > > libmad.so.0 library. At atrpms' it's the "libmad0" package.
> > >
> > > If one starts with rpmfusion, one gets libmad-0.15.1b-13.fc12, and
> > > atrpms' libmad-0.15.1b-4.fc14 loses version comparison: 4< 13
> > >
> > > [On the contrary, if one starts with atrpms, dependencies on
> libmad.so.0
> > > pull in the "libmad0" package, which conflicts with
> rpmfusion's libmad
> > > pkg. atrpms' libmad package contains no important library.]
> > >
> > > At rpmfusion, nothing requires the "libmad" package name:
> > >
> > > $ repoquery --exactdeps --whatrequires libmad
> > > libmad-0:0.15.1b-13.fc12.i586
> > > libmad-devel-0:0.15.1b-13.fc12.i586
> > >
> > > So, if nothing at atrpms explicitly requires "libmad0" either,
> one can
> > > stick to rpmfusion's libmad package without ever getting
> atrpms' libmad0
> > > package. Anything that wants libmad.so.0 will be happy with
> whatever
> > > provides that library.
> >
> > What you say does not make sense re libmad0. To wit:
> >
> > # rpm -q libmad0
> > libmad0-0.15.1b-4.fc14.i686
> > # rpm -e libmad0-0.15.1b-4.fc14.i686
>
> Not what I've asked you to do: "rpm -e libmad"
> What you tried to do is to erase a package that contains a needed
> shared library. That won't work, of course.
>
> > I did not manually and explicitly install libmad0.
>
> No, but libmad.
>
> > Yum resolved the dependencies of the packages you see above.
>
> Then please show the results of
>
> repoquery --exactdeps --whatrequires libmad
>
> NOT libmad0 (!) and return to what I've written above. The theory is
> that if you have just libmad0 and not libmad, you don't have get a
> conflict.
> --
> users mailing list
> users@lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:users@lists.fedoraproject.org>
> To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>
>
>
> Humm, Just did a quick reading...
>
> You could try (As Root in terminal):
>
> - yum clean all
>
> - yum makecache
>
> - yum -y update
>
> Hope this helps...
>
> Cheers!
>
>
> --
> <-Manuel Escudero->
> Linux User #509052
> @GWave: jmlevick@googlewave.com <mailto:jmlevick@googlewave.com>
> @Blogger: http://www.blogxenode.tk/ (Xenode Systems Blog)
> PGP/GnuPG: DAE3 82E9 D68E 7AE4 ED31 1F8F 4AF4 D00C 50E7 ABC6
>
Looks like after deleting the offending rpm for libmad
all is well now.
Yum check shows no problems and yum update shows no problems.

Cheers,

JD
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 04-08-2011, 05:24 PM
Greg Woods
 
Default F14 yum update conflict

On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 09:14 -0700, JD wrote:

> Looks like after deleting the offending rpm for libmad
> all is well now.
> Yum check shows no problems and yum update shows no problems.


The lesson for all to learn from this thread is that you have to be very
careful when using multiple third-party repos. What I do to avoid this
kind of thing is that only one of the third-party repos is enabled by
default. The other typically has only a few packages in it that I use,
so I enable that one only when I want to update packages that come from
it, and I ask for those packages specifically to prevent lots of
unrelated packages from being dragged in from that repo and confusing
things.

This would not apply to very specialized repos that contain a very small
number of specific packages, such as the Virtual Box repo that contains
only vbox packages, and the Adobe repo that I only have flash-plugin
from and it contains only Adobe packages. Those I can pretty much keep
enabled without causing problems.

--Greg


--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 04-08-2011, 08:24 PM
"Christopher K. Johnson"
 
Default F14 yum update conflict

On 04/08/2011 01:24 PM, Greg Woods wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 09:14 -0700, JD wrote:
>
>
>> Looks like after deleting the offending rpm for libmad
>> all is well now.
>> Yum check shows no problems and yum update shows no problems.
>>
>
> The lesson for all to learn from this thread is that you have to be very
> careful when using multiple third-party repos. What I do to avoid this
> kind of thing is that only one of the third-party repos is enabled by
> default.
The other way to avoid it is to 'yum install yum-priorities' and then
configure a priority value in each repo file.

Chris
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 04-08-2011, 08:37 PM
JD
 
Default F14 yum update conflict

On 04/08/2011 10:24 AM, Greg Woods wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 09:14 -0700, JD wrote:
>
>> Looks like after deleting the offending rpm for libmad
>> all is well now.
>> Yum check shows no problems and yum update shows no problems.
>
> The lesson for all to learn from this thread is that you have to be very
> careful when using multiple third-party repos. What I do to avoid this
> kind of thing is that only one of the third-party repos is enabled by
> default. The other typically has only a few packages in it that I use,
> so I enable that one only when I want to update packages that come from
> it, and I ask for those packages specifically to prevent lots of
> unrelated packages from being dragged in from that repo and confusing
> things.
>
> This would not apply to very specialized repos that contain a very small
> number of specific packages, such as the Virtual Box repo that contains
> only vbox packages, and the Adobe repo that I only have flash-plugin
> from and it contains only Adobe packages. Those I can pretty much keep
> enabled without causing problems.
>
> --Greg
>
>
True.
I just modified the .rpm files for rpmfusion and atrpms
to include only the packages I am interested in, and which
will not cause the havoc I've been through.

--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 04-08-2011, 08:42 PM
JD
 
Default F14 yum update conflict

On 04/08/2011 01:24 PM, Christopher K. Johnson wrote:
> yum install yum-priorities
Thanx! That's a good idea, although I do n ot
know if it would have saved me from all that headache.
I will try it.

--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 02:35 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org