Description of problem: On a new F8 installation "from scratch" cups failed to start with complaints about missing libdns_sd.so.1 library. Indeed, ldd also showed up (output attached) that this library is missing. A quick search revealed that this library is supplied by avahi-compat-libdns_sd package but that was not installed. This was indeed a "customized" installation where only "Base" and "GNOME Desktop" was selected and whatever else was installed was picked up by anaconda. An install.log file from that exercise is attached too. So this is a problem with cups package which is missing dependency on avahi-compat-libdns_sd, or something went awry with a resolver in anaconda, or avahi-compat-libdns_sd should be listed as "mandatory" in Fedora-8-comps.xml if cups has that status, or all of the above? How reproducible: no idea; tried that once
Created attachment 262511 [details] an output from 'ldd /usr/sbin/cupsd' with 'libdns_sd.so.1 => not found'
Created attachment 262521 [details] install.log from the installation in question
I realized that I can do another type of testing. On an installation with a problem I did 'rpm -e --nodeps cups' and after that I used with yum _only_ that repository from which anaconda was installing my test system. Then I got from yum: ============================================================================= Package Arch Version Repository Size ============================================================================= Installing: cups i386 1:1.3.4-2.fc8 fedora-wkb 3.4 M Installing for dependencies: avahi-compat-libdns_sd i386 0.6.21-6.fc8 fedora-wkb 25 k paps i386 0.6.6-21.fc8 fedora-wkb 33 k and all three packages installed without any issues. I missed paps before. That prompted me to install yum-utils and do 'package-cleanup --problems' Effects were like that: Package firefox requires system-bookmarks Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libFLAC.so.8 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libavc1394.so.0 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libcdio.so.7 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libcdio.so.7(CDIO_7) Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libdv.so.4 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libiec61883.so.0 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libraw1394.so.8 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires librom1394.so.0 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libshout.so.3 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libspeex.so.1 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libtag.so.1 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libwavpack.so.1 Once again - yum had no probles in finding all required packages without going to any "external" repositories (i.e. other that the one used in an installation) and now 'package-cleanup --problems' has no issues. It appears that dependencies are missed somewhere on an installation. OTOH I did some updates from FC6 basically in the same way (after applying a fix for bug 372011) and I did not observe anything of that sort. I wonder if this is not the same as bug 387791 which was closed with WORKSFORME. "Medium" in my case is surely "clean" as repository was accessed via NFS and/or HTTP.
*** Bug 387791 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
That looks more and more like some resolver issue. Changing "component" from cups to anaconda.
Once more I did an experiment of putting up a "small" F8 (i386) installation from scratch. This time I was careful to have in customization eplicitly choosen only two groups: "Gnome Desktop" and "Base". I ended up installing this time 587 packages. After adding yum-utils I got the following from 'package-cleanup --problems': Missing dependencies: Package xorg-x11-xinit requires ConsoleKit-x11 Package xorg-x11-xinit requires xauth Package xorg-x11-xinit requires xorg-x11-server-utils Package xorg-x11-server-Xorg requires xkbcomp Package xorg-x11-server-Xorg requires xkbdata Package xorg-x11-server-Xorg requires xorg-x11-drv-evdev Package xorg-x11-server-Xorg requires xorg-x11-drv-keyboard Package xorg-x11-server-Xorg requires xorg-x11-drv-mouse Package xorg-x11-server-Xorg requires xorg-x11-drv-vesa Package xorg-x11-server-Xorg requires xorg-x11-drv-void Package pirut requires comps-extras Package pirut requires notify-python Package firefox requires system-bookmarks Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libFLAC.so.8 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libavc1394.so.0 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libcdio.so.7 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libcdio.so.7(CDIO_7) Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libdv.so.4 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libiec61883.so.0 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libraw1394.so.8 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires librom1394.so.0 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libshout.so.3 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libspeex.so.1 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libtag.so.1 Package gstreamer-plugins-good requires libwavpack.so.1 cups is now not on that list but other things are. It looks that the problem is repeatable. 'firefox' and 'gstreamer-plugins-good' are affected the same way as before.
Are you able to reproduce the problem in F9?
I tried the same experiment with F9; i.e. I picked up in anaconda only "Base" and "Gnome Desktop". That installs now 645 packages and nearly 2GB of stuff. After that 'package-cleanup --problems' does not report any issues. OTOH such installation by default attempts to start in a graphics modes and it fails with Fatal server error: no screens found Not that surprising if one looks closer as the only display driver which got installed is xorg-x11-drv-vesa and X attempts, quite correctly, to use radeon - which is not there. Another "weird" behaviour is that this fragment if [ -n "$ipaddr" ]; then eval $(ipcalc -h $ipaddr 2>/dev/null) hostname ${HOSTNAME} fi of /etc/rc.d/rc.sysinit does not seem to be running and a host name is left as localhost.localdomain. When that code is executed later then everything is set in an expected manner. What is "missing" here I do not know at this moment.
Thank you for retesting. I'm going to move this to F9 bugs so it will get looked at.
Since we would like for there to be only one bug per report, could you open new reports with these issues? Since there seem to be no issues with the packages, the fatal error you're seeing likely means missing drivers for your video card.