Latest (12/23/04) up2date created problems: new libraries ==> broken dependencies. - Redhat

This is a discussion on Latest (12/23/04) up2date created problems: new libraries ==> broken dependencies. - Redhat ; I use usually YUM, but apt-get used along with synaptics (gUi front end) has some nice advantage: it detects broken packages. ( BTW how? Would "rpm" allow the same functionality?). In this case, the updates of glibc to the latest ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Latest (12/23/04) up2date created problems: new libraries ==> broken dependencies.

  1. Latest (12/23/04) up2date created problems: new libraries ==> broken dependencies.

    I use usually YUM, but apt-get used along with synaptics (gUi front end) has
    some nice advantage: it detects broken packages. ( BTW how? Would "rpm"
    allow the same functionality?).

    In this case, the updates of glibc to the latest (by up2date), created
    several troubles which became obvious when I tried to install "unrar".

    The following are marked as "broken":
    glibc#2.3.3.74
    glibc-common#2.3.3.74
    glibc-common#2.3-2.fc3
    qparted

    Many packages dependencies are broken, and synaptic "proposed" to fix the
    problem by deleting them!

    I understand, this may not be the best or right place to post this problem.
    But then what is the right place?
    Then is it an update revision number (or set of numbers) ?

    As always: feedback welcome.
    - AFC3 -





  2. Re: Latest (12/23/04) up2date created problems: new libraries ==> broken dependencies.

    On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 15:38:41 -0800, AnonymousFC3 wrote:

    > I use usually YUM, but apt-get used along with synaptics (gUi front end)
    > has some nice advantage: it detects broken packages. ( BTW how? Would
    > "rpm" allow the same functionality?).


    I also like apt/synaptic better then yum, your questions are answered by
    reviewing 'man rpm' for example from the man page for rpm;

    --aid Add suggested packages to the transaction set when needed.


    > In this case, the updates of glibc to the latest (by up2date), created
    > several troubles which became obvious when I tried to install "unrar".
    >
    > The following are marked as "broken": glibc#2.3.3.74
    > glibc-common#2.3.3.74
    > glibc-common#2.3-2.fc3
    > qparted


    This is strange when I ran the update on 12/23/04 my current list of the
    glibc packages are;

    $ rpm -qa 'glibc*'
    glibc-kernheaders-2.4-9.1.87
    glibc-2.3.4-2.fc3
    glibc-devel-2.3.4-2.fc3
    glibc-common-2.3.4-2.fc3
    glibc-headers-2.3.4-2.fc3


    > Many packages dependencies are broken, and synaptic "proposed" to fix
    > the problem by deleting them!


    Check your /etc/apt/sources.list and make sure you have the correct
    sources enabled, for example (where I get my FC3 updates from);

    rpm http://ayo.freshrpms.net/ fedora/linux/3/i386 core updates freshrpms

    It looks like you might have some old (FC2) or some Development sources
    enabled by possible mistake.

    Just for comparison the versions of apt and synaptic I'm using are;

    apt-0.5.15cnc6-1.1.fc3.fr.i386.rpm
    synaptic-0.55.1-1.1.fc3.fr.i386.rpm


    > I understand, this may not be the best or right place to post this
    > problem. But then what is the right place? Then is it an update revision
    > number (or set of numbers) ?


    As normal all the updates for Fedora Core are available here (and also the
    mirrors);

    http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pu.../core/updates/

    And updates for the most part are announced here;

    http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-announce-list/


    --
    "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
    safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759


  3. Re: Latest (12/23/04) up2date created problems: new libraries ==> broken dependencies --> Livna dependencies...

    Lenard:
    first thanks for the answer, now, I believe I figured out what went wrong:

    $ rpm -qa 'glibc*'
    glibc-2.3.3-74
    glibc-headers-2.3.4-2.fc3
    glibc-common-2.3.3-74
    glibc-devel-2.3.3-74
    glibc-common-2.3.4-2.fc3
    glibc-headers-2.3.3-74
    glibc-kernheaders-2.4-9.1.87
    glibc-devel-2.3.4-2.fc3
    glibc-2.3.4-2.fc3
    -------------------------------
    Which is indeed different of what you state, thanks.
    It took me a while, but this is probably due to this:
    Quite a while ago, I modified these two files (mostly to get the NVIDIA
    drivers):
    =====================
    file: /etc/sysconfig/rhn/sources

    # Added the following three lines
    yum livna-stable-fc3 http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/3/i386/yum/stable
    yum livna-testing-fc3 http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/3/i386/yum/testing
    yum livna-unstable-fc3 http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/3/i386/yum/unstable

    file: /etc/apt/sources.list
    # Fedora Linux 3
    rpm http://ayo.freshrpms.net fedora/linux/3/i386 core updates freshrpms

    # Added the following two lines
    rpm http://rpm.livna.org/ fedora/3/i386 stable unstable testing
    rpm-src http://rpm.livna.org/ fedora/3/i386 stable unstable testing
    =====================
    One of theses two files content seems to be "injected"
    into /etc/sysconfig/rhn/up2date and not for the best, in this case.
    =====================
    Now, how could I come back to an healthy system (not breaking anything?),
    could I just uninstall (erase) the uneeded rpm's ?
    After this, how could I keep possible access to livna.org (great for the
    very satisfactory NVIDIA drivers) and not "pollute" up2date?
    Of course, I could just comment out the livna lines, but it must be a better
    way?
    =====================
    - AFC3 -
    ---
    Lenard wrote:
    > On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 15:38:41 -0800, AnonymousFC3 wrote:
    >
    >> I use usually YUM, but apt-get used along with synaptics (gUi front end)
    >> has some nice advantage: it detects broken packages. ( BTW how? Would
    >> "rpm" allow the same functionality?).

    >
    > I also like apt/synaptic better then yum, your questions are answered by
    > reviewing 'man rpm' for example from the man page for rpm;
    >
    > --aid Add suggested packages to the transaction set when needed.
    >
    >
    >> In this case, the updates of glibc to the latest (by up2date), created
    >> several troubles which became obvious when I tried to install "unrar".
    >>
    >> The following are marked as "broken": glibc#2.3.3.74
    >> glibc-common#2.3.3.74
    >> glibc-common#2.3-2.fc3
    >> qparted

    >
    > This is strange when I ran the update on 12/23/04 my current list of the
    > glibc packages are;
    >
    > $ rpm -qa 'glibc*'
    > glibc-kernheaders-2.4-9.1.87 --- same ---
    > glibc-2.3.4-2.fc3 --- same ---
    > glibc-devel-2.3.4-2.fc3 --- same ---
    > glibc-common-2.3.4-2.fc3 --->
    > glibc-headers-2.3.4-2.fc3
    >
    >
    >> Many packages dependencies are broken, and synaptic "proposed" to fix
    >> the problem by deleting them!

    >
    > Check your /etc/apt/sources.list and make sure you have the correct
    > sources enabled, for example (where I get my FC3 updates from);
    >
    > rpm http://ayo.freshrpms.net/ fedora/linux/3/i386 core updates freshrpms
    >
    > It looks like you might have some old (FC2) or some Development sources
    > enabled by possible mistake.
    >
    > Just for comparison the versions of apt and synaptic I'm using are;
    >
    > apt-0.5.15cnc6-1.1.fc3.fr.i386.rpm
    > synaptic-0.55.1-1.1.fc3.fr.i386.rpm
    >
    >
    >> I understand, this may not be the best or right place to post this
    >> problem. But then what is the right place? Then is it an update revision
    >> number (or set of numbers) ?

    >
    > As normal all the updates for Fedora Core are available here (and also the
    > mirrors);
    >
    > http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pu.../core/updates/
    >
    > And updates for the most part are announced here;
    >
    > http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-announce-list/
    >
    >



  4. Re: Latest (12/23/04) up2date created problems: new libraries ==> broken dependencies --> Livna dependencies...

    On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 21:25:10 -0800, AnonymousFC3 wrote:

    > Lenard:
    > first thanks for the answer, now, I believe I figured out what went
    > wrong:
    >
    > $ rpm -qa 'glibc*'
    > glibc-2.3.3-74
    > glibc-headers-2.3.4-2.fc3
    > glibc-common-2.3.3-74
    > glibc-devel-2.3.3-74
    > glibc-common-2.3.4-2.fc3
    > glibc-headers-2.3.3-74
    > glibc-kernheaders-2.4-9.1.87
    > glibc-devel-2.3.4-2.fc3
    > glibc-2.3.4-2.fc3
    > -------------------------------


    Hmmm..... for some reason the older 2.3.3-74 glibc packages where not
    removed during the update process, as they should have been.


    > Which is indeed different of what you state, thanks. It took me a while,
    > but this is probably due to this: Quite a while ago, I modified these
    > two files (mostly to get the NVIDIA drivers): =====================
    > file: /etc/sysconfig/rhn/sources
    >
    > # Added the following three lines
    > yum livna-stable-fc3 http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/3/i386/yum/stable yum
    > livna-testing-fc3 http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/3/i386/yum/testing yum
    > livna-unstable-fc3 http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/3/i386/yum/unstable
    >
    > file: /etc/apt/sources.list
    > # Fedora Linux 3
    > rpm http://ayo.freshrpms.net fedora/linux/3/i386 core updates freshrpms
    >
    > # Added the following two lines
    > rpm http://rpm.livna.org/ fedora/3/i386 stable unstable testing rpm-src
    > http://rpm.livna.org/ fedora/3/i386 stable unstable testing
    > =====================
    > One of theses two files content seems to be "injected" into
    > /etc/sysconfig/rhn/up2date and not for the best, in this case.
    > =====================


    You might want to remove the testing and unstable yum and apt
    repositories, for example with apt;

    rpm http://rpm.livna.org/ fedora/3/i386 stable

    rpm-src http://rpm.livna.org/ fedora/3/i386 stable

    I see nothing in the livna.org FC3 repositories that would have caused
    this problem. However, livna.org does recommend that you do use the
    apt/synaptic from fedora.us. But according to fedora.us the FC3 apt,
    synatic and yum packages are not available yet. Also fedora.us has a
    warning that you might have missed and should be aware of;

    http://www.fedora.us/wiki/RepositoryMixingProblems


    > Now, how could I come back to an healthy system (not breaking
    > anything?), could I just uninstall (erase) the uneeded rpm's ? After
    > this, how could I keep possible access to livna.org (great for the very
    > satisfactory NVIDIA drivers) and not "pollute" up2date? Of course, I
    > could just comment out the livna lines, but it must be a better way?
    > =====================


    I already provided you a healthy list of the FC3 glibc rpm packages in my
    earlier reply, just place them in a separate location (if still available)
    and do something like 'rpm -Uvh *.rpm --force' w/o the quotes. This should
    hopefully correct the problem by removing the older glibc 2.3.3-74
    packages. And before I forget about the qparted(sp???) package, I have
    installed on my system's the qtparted-0.4.4-1.rhfc3.nr.i386.rpm available
    here; http://rpm.pbone.net/

    Use either yum/update or apt/synatic not both. If apt/synaptic configure
    to both 'download only' and to 'verify' the packages. Keep and clean the
    default download location (/var/cache/apt/archives) before downloading any
    new updates. Then test (always a good idea) the new updates before
    installing them; rpm -Uvh *.rpm --test

    Happy Holidays


    --
    "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
    safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759


  5. Re: Latest (12/23/04) up2date created problems: just "rpm erased" the unnecessary packages... and it did the work.

    Lenard:
    thanks for the help.
    I just "rpm erased" the unnecessary packages... and it did the work: no more
    broken dependencies. Confusing though.
    - AFC3 -
    ---------
    Lenard wrote:
    > On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 21:25:10 -0800, AnonymousFC3 wrote:
    >



+ Reply to Thread