On Ter, 2016-10-11 at 13:37 +0200, Joachim Backes wrote:
> On 10/11/16 11:47, Ian Kent wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 2016-10-11 at 11:23 +0200, Sandro Mani wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11.10.2016 11:15, Ian Kent wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 2016-10-11 at 16:29 +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>> I guess the other thing you could do is grab the libvpx-1.5.0
>>>> source rpm and
>>>> give it a different name like libvpx-compat, build and install
>>>> it then the
>>>> requirement of VirtualBox should be met without the
>>>> dependencyLuxemburgo confessa agora que foi longe de mais, mas
>>>> era inevitável. "Hoje não o faria, mas pela forma como se
>>>> acercou de mim... Nenhum dirigente pode falar assim a um
>>>> treinador ou a um jogador quando a adrenalina ainda está a
>>>> correr". side effects
>>>> above.
>>>
https://smani.fedorapeople.org/compat-libvpx-1.5.0-1.fc26.src.rpm
>> Well done Sandro, I see you've taken care to clean up the extra
>> installed files,
>> this should work just fine Joachim.
> Hi Ian Kent and Sandro Mani,
>
> this worked flawlessly (The only additional thing I had to do was to
> install /usr/bin/rpmbuild). After having installed the newly built
> rpm,
> I could install a working VirtualBox.
>
> Tank you very much.
May I recomend you rpmfusion rpms ? I am the packager maintainer and
any feedback is welcome)
Hi Sergio,
i switched from Rpmfusion to Unitedrpms because Rpmfusion always laggs
behind new Fedora versions, so ready-for-use packages are missing for a
longer time period after a new Fedora appears. Unitedrpms seems to be
faster.
Kind regards
Joachim Backes
--
Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five)
Kernel-4.8.1-1.fc25.x86_64
Joachim Backes <joachim.backes(a)rhrk.uni-kl.de>