[PlanetCCRMA] New conflict with f9 update (and f8 too)

[Simon W. Fielding]

Would it be possible to do the same for FC8? I would be very grateful if
so.

Regards,
Simon Fielding

-----Original Message-----
From: planetccrma-bounces at ccrma.Stanford.EDU
[mailto:planetccrma-bounces at ccrma.Stanford.EDU] On Behalf Of Fernando
Lopez-Lezcano
Sent: 27 November 2008 00:07
To: dawsonwu at rahul.net
Cc: planetccrma at ccrma.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: [PlanetCCRMA] New conflict with f9 update

On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 14:52 -0800, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 14:32 -0800, Ken Dawson wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Fedora 9 just posted an update to sbcl.i386, and slime-sbcl doesn't
seem
> > to like it.
> > 
> > /ken
> > 
> > # yum update
> > Loaded plugins: refresh-packagekit
> > Setting up Update Process
> > Resolving Dependencies
> > --> Running transaction check
> > ---> Package sbcl.i386 0:1.0.22-1.fc9 set to be updated
> > --> Processing Dependency: sbcl = 1.0.17 for package: slime-sbcl
> > --> Finished Dependency Resolution
> > slime-sbcl-2.0-12.fc9.ccrma.i386 from installed has depsolving
problems
> >   --> Missing Dependency: sbcl = 1.0.17 is needed by package
> > slime-sbcl-2.0-12.fc9.ccrma.i386 (installed)
> > Error: Missing Dependency: sbcl = 1.0.17 is needed by package
> > slime-sbcl-2.0-12.fc9.ccrma.i386 (installed)
> 
> Yes, I'm working on it, thanks for the report!

Should be fixed now (new build of slime + clm + cm + cmn on i386)
-- Fernando


_______________________________________________
PlanetCCRMA mailing list
PlanetCCRMA at ccrma.stanford.edu
http://ccrma-mail.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/planetccrma