Bug 83099
| Summary: | Dependency on version stops release-only upgrade | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Raw Hide | Reporter: | Ralph Loader <suckfish> |
| Component: | gdk-pixbuf | Assignee: | Owen Taylor <otaylor> |
| Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Brian Brock <bbrock> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | 1.0 | CC: | notting |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2003-06-10 22:17:49 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: | |||
What's the story with this, Bill? I don't immediately see anything wrong with the gdk-pixbuf Requires:. The requirement doesn't have an epoch matching the epoch of the main package; that's why RPM is throwing the error. rpm is not being consistent, as far as I can see. If I upgrade from both at ...-6 to both at ...-7 there is no error. When I try and upgrade from the mixture to both at ...-7, there is an error. Surely whether or not the dependencies are correct should only depend on what I'm upgrading to, not on what I'm upgrading from? Even if there is a packaging problem, the rpm behaviour seems counterintuitive to me. * Tue Jun 3 2003 Jeff Johnson <jbj>
- add explicit epoch's where needed.
|
Description of problem: Upgrading from "gdk-pixbuf-0.18.0-6" to "gdk-pixbuf-0.18.0-7" fails when there is a dependency "gdk-pixbuf = 0.18.0": # rpm -q gdk-pixbuf gdk-pixbuf-gnome gdk-pixbuf-0.18.0-6 gdk-pixbuf-gnome-0.18.0-7 # rpm -Uvh gdk-pixbuf-0.18.0-7.i386.rpm error: Failed dependencies: gdk-pixbuf = 0.18.0 is needed by (installed) gdk-pixbuf-gnome-0.18.0-7 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): # rpm -q rpm rpm-4.2-0.63 How reproducible: Every time. Seems to happen with other packages too: if there is a dependency foo=x then I can't upgrade from foo-x-y to foo-x-(y+1). Actual results: package upgrade fails. Expected results: The package upgrade above should succeed.