[PlanetCCRMA] Re: a note for Fedora Core 1 users

[Axel Thimm]

--jkO+KyKz7TfD21mV
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 10:51:08AM -0800, Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano wrot=
e:
> > Yes, you should remove the Conflicts: and keep the Obsoletes:
>=20
> I tried that last week (as a last test before releasing anyway), and did
> not work either. Apt/rpm would still try to install pd-flext and the rpm
> update process would not erase flext. It fails with "conflicting files"
> for both packages (as if the Obsoletes: has no effect).=20
> [...]
> I don't think my apt is that new. Using rpm alone in RedHat *.* (no apt)
> "rpm -Uvh" of a package that had an Obsoletes would replace the
> obsoleted package with the new one. That does not seem to happen anymore
> in FC1 (again, using only rpm, no apt). I'll test again to make sure but
> that is what I was seeing in my FC1 machine.=20

You mean that is already happening on rpm level? That would be a
severe bug!

I suppose one of the following could be happening:

o the Obsolete is versioned, and the package has an epoch
o requirements on the obsoleted package are not fulfilled by the
  obsoleting package (test active dependencies with rpm --test -e
  obsoleted_package). This can also happen if multiple packages
  obsolete a set of packages, you need to place all new packages on
  the cmdline after -Uhv.
o your rpm database is corrupted and rpm -Uhv doesn't detect the
  obsoleted package, but only its conflicting files.
--=20
Axel.Thimm@physik.fu-berlin.de

--jkO+KyKz7TfD21mV
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAAvZNQBVS1GOamfERAv5uAJ9z8KJvm3DSZsQGpVzRxNFFpHqbrwCfcUEW
7XaqVvNbW+wCLudjRmLiq7A=
=JaSN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--jkO+KyKz7TfD21mV--