Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0 on a still to be determined date in the near future. The original upgrade date has been delayed.
Bug 62642 - File conflict between ghostscript and gimp-print-cups
File conflict between ghostscript and gimp-print-cups
Product: Red Hat Public Beta
Classification: Retired
Component: ghostscript (Show other bugs)
i386 Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Tim Waugh
David Lawrence
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2002-04-03 12:48 EST by Glen A. Foster
Modified: 2008-08-01 12:22 EDT (History)
0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2002-04-03 16:40:51 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Glen A. Foster 2002-04-03 12:48:09 EST
Description of Problem: Unableto use up2date to upgrade packages made available
since initial distribution of Skipjack public beta.  Process goes as expected
until 99% through "testing package set / solving dependencies".  Up2date then
complains about a file conflict.  The dialog box says (quote):

"Test install failed because of package conflicts:

file /usr/bin/cups-calibrate from install of gimp-print-cups-4.2.0-6 conflicts
with file from package ghostscript-6.53-4"

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
[Packages installed on my system are straight from skipjack install]

# rpm -q ghostscript gimp-print-cups

How Reproducible: 100% (always)

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install Skipjack
2. run rhn_register
3. run up2date

Actual Results: file conflict

Expected Results: successful upgrade
Comment 1 Matt Wilson 2002-04-03 16:40:45 EST
rpm -qi gimp-print-cups shows you that the src rpm is ghostscript.
Comment 2 Jay Turner 2002-04-03 16:42:33 EST
This is actually a ghostscript packaging problem.  Is fixed in the build system.
Comment 3 Glen A. Foster 2002-04-15 18:23:46 EDT
So out of curiosity, what's the resolution on this defect?  NOTABUG, RAWHIDE,
Comment 4 Tim Waugh 2002-04-16 02:28:11 EDT

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