Description of problem: SSIA .qa.[root@ia64-5s-m2 tps]# rpm -q gtk2 gtk2-2.10.4-20.el5.ia64 gtk2-2.10.4-20.el5.i386 .qa.[root@ia64-5s-m2 tps]# tps-upgrade Upgrading 2010:10234 using command: rpm -Uvh $(cat new-files-5Server-ia64.list) Preparing... ########################################### [100%]) 1:gtk2 ########################################### [ 20%]) 2:gtk2 ########################################### [ 40%]) /emul/ia32-linux/usr/bin/update-gdk-pixbuf-loaders: line 44: /usr/bin/gdk-pixbuf-query-loaders-32: No such file or directory /emul/ia32-linux/usr/bin/update-gtk-immodules: line 44: /usr/bin/gtk-query-immodules-2.0-32: No such file or directory error: %post(gtk2-2.10.4-21.el5_5.1.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 127 3:gtk2-debuginfo ########################################### [ 60%]) 4:gtk2-debuginfo ########################################### [ 80%]) 5:gtk2-devel ########################################### [100%]) .qa.[root@ia64-5s-m2 tps]# rpm -q gtk2 gtk2-2.10.4-20.el5.i386 gtk2-2.10.4-21.el5_5.1.ia64 gtk2-2.10.4-21.el5_5.1.i386 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): gtk2-2.10.4-21.el5_5.1.i386 How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Failure Expected results: No failure Additional info: Updating gtk2-2.10.4-20.el5.i386 -> gtk2-2.10.4-21.el5_5.1.i386
Hmm, I can't see what is going wrong here. The i386 package definitively contains /usr/bin/gdk-pixbuf-query-loaders-32
The problem here might be that update-gdk-pixbuf-loaders asks for gdk-pixbuf-query-loaders-32 using explicit path, /usr/bin/gdk-pixbuf-query-loaders-32. On ia64, i386 packages are installed to /emul/ia32-linux. I think it might need to ask for /emul/ia32-linux/usr/bin/gdk-pixbuf-query-loaders-32 I have no idea what the right way to fix this is. One option that comes to mind is asking for ./gdk-pixbuf-query-loaders-32, or perhaps extracting current dir from $0 and looking for the binary there. I'll look into it some more, but these are the first thoughts.
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2013-1366.html