Bug 203771 - yum upgrade glibc fails due to glibc-devel requiring glibc-headers on multiarch
yum upgrade glibc fails due to glibc-devel requiring glibc-headers on multiarch
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: glibc (Show other bugs)
rawhide
x86_64 Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Jakub Jelinek
Brian Brock
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2006-08-23 13:32 EDT by John (J5) Palmieri
Modified: 2016-11-24 11:15 EST (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-08-23 14:27:05 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)
attached is the output of yum upgrade glibc (1.99 KB, application/octet-stream)
2006-08-23 13:57 EDT, John (J5) Palmieri
no flags Details

  None (edit)
Description John (J5) Palmieri 2006-08-23 13:32:36 EDT
Description of problem:

I think there is a multiarch packaging issue with the glibc-devel.  It needs
glibc-headers but there is only an x86_64 version available yet I have both the
x86_64 and i386 glibc-devel packages installed.  This is a rawhide machine that
was installed before FC-4.  I hadn't updated it in a couple of months.
Comment 1 Jakub Jelinek 2006-08-23 13:48:18 EDT
On x86_64, you are supposed to have glibc-headers.x86_64 installed and
either just glibc-devel.x86_64 (if you don't want to be able to build 32-bit
programs), or both glibc-devel.x86_64 and glibc-devel.i386.

Are you updating by hand and only specifying some of the glibc subpackages
on the command line, or yum update'ing only certain subpackages explicitly?

Please show the command you were trying and what errors you have been given.
Comment 2 John (J5) Palmieri 2006-08-23 13:57:13 EDT
Created attachment 134736 [details]
attached is the output of yum upgrade glibc
Comment 3 Jakub Jelinek 2006-08-23 14:27:05 EDT
Either you are looking at inconsistent repository (which contains some 2.4.90-23
and some 2.4.90-10 subpackages), or you chose to upgrade only glibc{,-common}
and not devel etc.
In any case, that's not a glibc packaging bug.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.