[PlanetCCRMA] FC2 "experimental" kernel install dependency error

[Brad Fuller]

Ok, I got the kernel 2.6.7-1.437.1.11.rhfc2.ccrma loaded. Unfortunately, 
Xwindows didn't start up. I had to change the nvidia6111 driver to the 
older one -- and then X started up. Why would this be? I was going to 
install 6111 again -- the nvidia installer said it was already installed 
(thought maybe there was some interaction between this kernel and 
nvidia6111.)

Anyone come across this?

brad

Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano wrote:

>On Wed, 2004-11-03 at 22:43, Brad Fuller wrote:
>  
>
>>Tried to install the new FC2 ccrma kernel:
>>
>># apt-get install planetccrma-core
>>
>>but received a conflict that 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>file /usr/lib/libasound.so.2.0.0 from install of
>>>      
>>>
>>alsa-lib-1.0.5-1.cvs.rhfc2.ccrma conflicts with file from package
>>libasound2.1.0.6-16.rhfc2.at
>>    
>>
>
>That's a conflict caused by unfortunate non-standard naming of the alsa
>library packages at atrpms. I should (will in the next release) include
>an "Obsoletes:" clause for them, but the proper fix will be for atrpms
>to return to the "standard" naming of those packages ("standard" as in
>"what all others do, including the base redhat/fedora distribution"). 
>
>  
>
>>A LOT of packages depend on the libasound2.10.06. Any way to get
>>around this? 
>>    
>>
>
>You can either install the planetccrma-core critical components one by
>one, or get rid of the libasound2 packages and replace them by the
>equivalent alsa-lib packages (BTW, is there an explicit dependency on
>libasound2?, there should not be one, try "rpm -q --whatrequires
>libasound2"). 
>
>For the first option, do an "apt-get install kernel" and you will see
>the choices you have. The most conservative one for fc2 will be
>kernel#2.6.7-1.437.1.ll.rhfc2.ccrma (that is the one "required" by
>planetccrma-core), there are other more experimental kernels in the
>"planetedge" repository. Those have better low latency performance but
>are riskier to run[*]. 
>
>I posted this a while ago:
>  
>
>>The best kernels I currently have for 2.6 are in the "experimental"
>>repository, they have to be installed explicitly (not through a meta
>>package), and they are only advertised in the mailing list. 
>>
>>Check this post for information on current latest bleeding edge
>>kernel:
>>http://ccrma-mail.stanford.edu/pipermail/planetccrma/2004-August/005879.html
>>And follow the link inside for more details...
>>
>>Remember that before trying the apt-get install xxx. you have to add
>>another line to the /etc/apt/sources.list (same as the planetcore
>>line, but replacing planetcore with planetedge), and do an apt-get
>>update. 
>>    
>>
>
>If you install either (edge or conservative), you also have available a
>newer alsa than the one included in the kernel itself, for that do an:
>
>apt-get install kernel-module-alsa
>
>and again you will get choices. Explicitly install the one that matches
>the kernel you just installed. 
>
>-- Fernando
>
>[*] I was hoping that by now the experimental voluntary-preempt patches
>for very good low latency performance would have stabilized a lot, but
>another approach was taken by Ingo Molnar and we now have a very new
>"realtime-preempt" patch that promises to be even better. Regretfully it
>is still quite unstable. I'm trying it out regularly and trying to
>follow its development but I have not posted experimental packages yet
>(let me know if any on the list needs to be a guinea pig). 
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>PlanetCCRMA mailing list
>PlanetCCRMA at ccrma.stanford.edu
>http://ccrma-mail.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/planetccrma
>
>
>  
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://cm-mail.stanford.edu/pipermail/planetccrma/attachments/20041104/e9662e8f/attachment.html>