Bug 218031

Summary:	general dependency error upgrading to fc6
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	kballen <kballen1>
Component:	libavc1394	Assignee:	Jarod Wilson <jarod>
Status:	CLOSED NEXTRELEASE	QA Contact:
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	6	CC:	axel.thimm, jarod
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	Reopened
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	x86_64
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2006-12-14 22:15:52 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description kballen 2006-12-01 13:39:54 UTC

Description of problem:
When upgrading from FC5 to FC6 using yum as per YumUpgradeFaq on the wiki, I 
encountered the following dependency error:
Transaction Check Error:   file /usr/lib64/libavc1394.so.0.3.0 from install of 
libavc1394-0.5.3-1.fc6 conflicts with file from package libavc1394_0-0.5.3-
0_9.fc5.at
  file /usr/lib64/librom1394.so.0.3.0 from install of libavc1394-0.5.3-1.fc6 
conflicts with file from package librom1394_0-0.5.3-0_9.fc5.at


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
FC5, FC6

How reproducible:
Install FC5 x86-64.
Try to upgrade to FC6 using yum.

Comment 1 Jarod Wilson 2006-12-01 20:56:46 UTC

Hrm, looks like you've got 3rd-party libavc1394/librom1394 bits from atrpms.net
in your FC5 install. So far as I can see, atrpms.net doesn't carry any
libavc1394/librom1394 bits for FC6, and the broken out libs from the FC5/atrpms
package aren't getting replaced by the FC6 libavc1394 package. Hrm.

I'd probably say 'yum remove libavc1394_0 librom1394_0', then 'yum install
libavc1394', or something along those lines. This isn't actually a libavc1394
bug, I think its an issue with the depsolver (yum) not liking the broken-out lib
packaging when trying to upgrade to a newer package that doesn't use broken-out
libs.

Comment 2 Jarod Wilson 2006-12-11 19:08:31 UTC

I'm guessing this is wontfix or notabug (and should be taken up w/atrpms), but
I'll assign the bug over to yum and let the call be made there.

Comment 3 Jeremy Katz 2006-12-11 19:37:55 UTC

There's nothing yum can do.  The libavc1394 packages we ship _could_ obsolete
those packages.

Comment 4 Jarod Wilson 2006-12-13 21:24:03 UTC

Axel, any thoughts/suggestions on this issue?

Comment 5 Jarod Wilson 2006-12-13 21:25:03 UTC

Whoops, didn't mean to close this...

Comment 6 Axel Thimm 2006-12-14 01:03:15 UTC

There are three things I can do:

o keep a copy indefinitely in ATrpms (bad)
o promote soname-in-lib methology (currently not a good chance)
o ask for help
(http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2005-December/msg01345.html)

Jarod, could you please add to rawhide

Obsoletes: libavc1394_0 <= %{version}-%{release}, librpm1394_0 <=
%{version}-%{release}

I wouldn't push that as an update by itself, but if you'll update FC6/FC5 for
other reasons, please add the Obsoletes: line, thanks!

Comment 7 Jarod Wilson 2006-12-14 22:15:52 UTC

(In reply to comment #6)
> Jarod, could you please add to rawhide
> 
> Obsoletes: libavc1394_0 <= %{version}-%{release}, librpm1394_0 <=
> %{version}-%{release}

Okay, FC6 and devel cvs has been updated to include this change. I've got
another libavc1394 bug that'll require a respin once I get to it, so the next
release will carry this update, closing accordingly.