Description of problem:
I upgraded from F13 to F14 via the install DVD, then I ran "yum distro-sync". After this, I still had libjpeg-6b-46.fc12.i686. "yum check" complains about this.
In particular, I had the following RPMs installed:
# rpm -q libjpeg
# rpm -q libjpeg-turbo
# yum check
libjpeg-6b-46.fc12.i686 is obsoleted by libjpeg-turbo-1.0.1-1.fc14.1.x86_64
# yum upgrade 'libjpeg*'
No Packages marked for Update
There were lots of packages which had a dependency on libjpeg.
It looks like either anaconda or yum should have replaced libjpeg.fc12.i686 with libjpeg-turbo.fc.i686.
I was able to fix the problem by manually running "yum install libjpeg-turbo.i686", which installed libjpeg-turbo.i686 and erased libjpeg.i686. However, I shouldn't have to do this manually. Moreover, I shouldn't have to know to run "yum install"; "yum upgrade" should automatically figure out that there is a newer version available and upgrade it for me.
There is nothing in /root/upgrade.log* or /var/log/ that seems to help debug this:
# egrep -i libjpeg /root/upgrade.log* /var/log/anaconda*
Nothing about libjpeg.i686.
Interesting bug! It looks like libjpeg-turbo definitely %obsoletes the libjpeg package.
# repoquery -q --obsoletes libjpeg-turbo.x86_64
libjpeg < 6b-47
# repoquery -q --whatobsoletes libjpeg
So it's non-obvious why you now have both libjpeg.i686 and libjpeg-turbo.x86_64 installed. Note the different architectures. Perhaps libjpeg-turbo.x86_64 was pulled in to satisfy some dependency, and there was no libjpeg.x86_64 on the system so there is nothing to %obsolete. A yum expert might know better here. Is this a case of cross-architecture %obsoletes?
Seeing the yum.log from the upgrade would be interesting, but you already noted there was no data out of /var/log/anaconda-yum.log.
Thanks for taking a look, I appreciate it! Don't hesitate to let me know if there's anything I can extract out of "yum history" that would help you diagnose this. I wasn't able to turn up anything more that seemed obviously useful, but I'm happy to provide any additional information that would help.
(Hmm. Brainstorming: Is yum able to correctly identify that libjpeg-6b-46 matches "libjpeg < 6b-47"? Could the non-traditional version numbering scheme be giving yum or anaconda difficulty? Feel free to ignore this if it doesn't seem like a likely hypothesis.)
I've not been able to reproduce this anywhere, nor have we gotten any other reports of it. Sorry.