Bug 246598 - yum replaces digikamimageplugins.x86_64 0.9.1-1.fc7 with digikam.i386
Summary: yum replaces digikamimageplugins.x86_64 0.9.1-1.fc7 with digikam.i386
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: yum
Version: 7
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
low
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jeremy Katz
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2007-07-03 11:31 UTC by Roderick Johnstone
Modified: 2014-01-21 22:58 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2007-07-06 20:23:16 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
output of yum -d 6 update (149.22 KB, application/octet-stream)
2007-07-03 11:31 UTC, Roderick Johnstone
no flags Details

Description Roderick Johnstone 2007-07-03 11:31:58 UTC
Description of problem:
yum update tries to install digikam.i386 when replacing
digikamimageplugins.x86_64 0.9.1-1.fc7.

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

yum-3.2.1-1.fc7
with patch from BZ#246078, and additional patch from comment #9 of #246078  (but
it was the same before I applied any patch).

How reproducible:
Every time

Steps to Reproduce:
1. yum update
2.
3.
  
Actual results:
Installing:
 digikam                 x86_64     0.9.2-1.fc7      updates            10 M
     replacing  digikamimageplugins.x86_64 0.9.1-1.fc7

 digikam                 i386       0.9.2-1.fc7      updates            10 M
     replacing  digikamimageplugins.x86_64 0.9.1-1.fc7


Expected results:
Installing:
 digikam                 x86_64     0.9.2-1.fc7      updates            10 M
     replacing  digikamimageplugins.x86_64 0.9.1-1.fc7


Additional info:
Installing digikam.i386 then sucks in other unwanted i386 packages.

Comment 1 Roderick Johnstone 2007-07-03 11:31:58 UTC
Created attachment 158425 [details]
output of yum -d 6 update

Comment 2 Jeremy Katz 2007-07-06 20:23:16 UTC
This is the right thing given that obsoletes aren't arch-specific


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