Trying to install the F24 version of VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6 in F25

[Joachim Backes]

Hi testers,

I'm trying to install the F24 version of VirtualBox in F25 because no 
F25 version is available

Anybody tried this and was successful?

I'm experiencing this error:

sudo dnf install VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6_110634_fedora24-1.x86_64.rpm
Last metadata expiration check: 3:04:28 ago on Tue Oct 11 06:49:21 2016.
Error: *nothing provides libvpx.so.3()(64bit)* needed by 
VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6_110634_fedora24-1.x86_64
(try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting 
packages)

All comments are welcome.

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&gt;
http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/

[Ian Kent]

On Tue, 2016-10-11 at 09:56 +0200, Joachim Backes wrote:
>  Hi testers,
>  
>  I'm trying to install the F24 version of VirtualBox in F25 because no 
>  F25 version is available
>  
>  Anybody tried this and was successful?
>  
>  I'm experiencing this error:
>  
>  sudo dnf install VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6_110634_fedora24-1.x86_64.rpm
>  Last metadata expiration check: 3:04:28 ago on Tue Oct 11 06:49:21 2016.
>  Error: *nothing provides libvpx.so.3()(64bit)* needed by 
>  VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6_110634_fedora24-1.x86_64 
That's happening because there is no libvpx.so.3 in F25, obviously.

It looks like F25 has gone from libvpx-1.5.0 (libvpx.so.3) to libvpx-1.6.0
(libvpx.so.4).

Creating a symlink from /usr/lib64/libvpx.so.3 to /usr/lib64/libvpx.so.4.0.0
might work (if the library api has not changed, or at least the calls needed
have not changed, but there might be symbol naming problems as well).

But really what you need is a VirtualBox package built against the new version,
libvpx-1.6.0.

Alternately you could build the source package of libvpx-1.5.0 on F25, remove
libvpx-1.6.0, and then install the libvpx-1.5.0 and make sure to exclude that
package when updating.

But there are probably other package dependencies requiring libvpx-1.6.0 so it
will quickly get tedious building (and rebuilding) dependencies and excluding
those from updates too.

Ian

[Ian Kent]

On Tue, 2016-10-11 at 16:29 +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
>  On Tue, 2016-10-11 at 09:56 +0200, Joachim Backes wrote:
>  > Hi testers,
>  > 
>  > I'm trying to install the F24 version of VirtualBox in F25 because no 
>  > F25 version is available
>  > 
>  > Anybody tried this and was successful?
>  > 
>  > I'm experiencing this error:
>  > 
>  > sudo dnf install VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6_110634_fedora24-1.x86_64.rpm
>  > Last metadata expiration check: 3:04:28 ago on Tue Oct 11 06:49:21 2016.
>  > Error: *nothing provides libvpx.so.3()(64bit)* needed by 
>  > VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6_110634_fedora24-1.x86_64
>  
>  That's happening because there is no libvpx.so.3 in F25, obviously.
>  
>  It looks like F25 has gone from libvpx-1.5.0 (libvpx.so.3) to libvpx-1.6.0
>  (libvpx.so.4).
>  
>  Creating a symlink from /usr/lib64/libvpx.so.3 to /usr/lib64/libvpx.so.4.0.0
>  might work (if the library api has not changed, or at least the calls needed
>  have not changed, but there might be symbol naming problems as well).
>  
>  But really what you need is a VirtualBox package built against the new
>  version,
>  libvpx-1.6.0.
>  
>  Alternately you could build the source package of libvpx-1.5.0 on F25, remove
>  libvpx-1.6.0, and then install the libvpx-1.5.0 and make sure to exclude that
>  package when updating.
>  
>  But there are probably other package dependencies requiring libvpx-1.6.0 so it
>  will quickly get tedious building (and rebuilding) dependencies and excluding
>  those from updates too. 
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 dependency side effects
above.

> 
> Ian
> _______________________________________________
> test mailing list -- test(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to test-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org

[Sandro Mani]

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 dependency side effects
>  above. 
https://smani.fedorapeople.org/compat-libvpx-1.5.0-1.fc26.src.rpm

[Ian Kent]

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 dependency 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.

Ian

[Joachim Backes]

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 dependency 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.

Joachim Backes

-- 

Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five)
Kernel-4.8.1-1.fc25.x86_64


Joachim Backes <joachim.backes(a)rhrk.uni-kl.de&gt;
http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/

[Sérgio Basto]

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)  

http://rpmfusion.org/Howto/VirtualBox

>  Joachim Backes
>   
-- 
Sérgio M. B.

[Joachim Backes]

On 10/11/16 14:48, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>  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
>  http://rpmfusion.org/Howto/VirtualBox
>
> > Joachim Backes
> > 

-- 

Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five)
Kernel-4.8.1-1.fc25.x86_64


Joachim Backes <joachim.backes(a)rhrk.uni-kl.de&gt;
http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/

[Sérgio Basto]

On Ter, 2016-10-11 at 15:46 +0200, Joachim Backes wrote:
>  On 10/11/16 14:48, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>  > 
>  > 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. 
Hopefully not anymore , RPMFusion is ready for F25 and rawhide now . 

>  Kind regards
>  
>  Joachim Backes
>  > 
>  > http://rpmfusion.org/Howto/VirtualBox
>  > 
>  > > 
>  > > Joachim Backes
>  > > 
>   
-- 
Sérgio M. B.

[Ed Greshko]

On 10/11/16 15:56, Joachim Backes wrote:
>  Hi testers,
>
>  I'm trying to install the F24 version of VirtualBox in F25 because no F25 version is
>  available
>
>  Anybody tried this and was successful?
>
>  I'm experiencing this error:
>
>  sudo dnf install VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6_110634_fedora24-1.x86_64.rpm
>  Last metadata expiration check: 3:04:28 ago on Tue Oct 11 06:49:21 2016.
>  Error: *nothing provides libvpx.so.3()(64bit)* needed by
>  VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6_110634_fedora24-1.x86_64
>  (try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting packages)
>
>  All comments are welcome.
>  
I have not tried to install it....  But the answer is libvpx-1.5.0-4.fc24.x86_64 in F24
provides /usr/lib/libvpx.so.3 while in F25 libvpx-1.6.0-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm is the new
package which provides the newer version /usr/lib/libvpx.so.4.

So, I guess you can try to download the source and try to rebuild it yourself for the F25
environment.  :-)

-- 
You're Welcome Zachary Quinto

[Jacob Godyn]

Hi,

In changelog of libvpx we can read :
- Upgrading:
This release is ABI incompatible with 1.5.0 due to a new 'color_range' enum
in vpx_image and some minor changes to the VP8_COMP structure.
The default key frame interval for VP9 has changed from 128 to 9999.
source : https://chromium.googlesource.com/webm/libvpx/+/master/CHANGELOG

So you can't create a symbolic link from libvpx.so.3 to libvpx.so.4, you
need try to rebuild the library.

Kind regards

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Ed Greshko <ed.greshko(a)greshko.com&gt; wrote:

>  On 10/11/16 15:56, Joachim Backes wrote:
>  > Hi testers,
>  >
>  > I'm trying to install the F24 version of VirtualBox in F25 because no
>  F25 version is
>  > available
>  >
>  > Anybody tried this and was successful?
>  >
>  > I'm experiencing this error:
>  >
>  > sudo dnf install VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6_110634_fedora24-1.x86_64.rpm
>  > Last metadata expiration check: 3:04:28 ago on Tue Oct 11 06:49:21 2016.
>  > Error: *nothing provides libvpx.so.3()(64bit)* needed by
>  > VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6_110634_fedora24-1.x86_64
>  > (try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting
>  packages)
>  >
>  > All comments are welcome.
>  >
>
>  I have not tried to install it....  But the answer is
>  libvpx-1.5.0-4.fc24.x86_64 in F24
>  provides /usr/lib/libvpx.so.3 while in F25 libvpx-1.6.0-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
>  is the new
>  package which provides the newer version /usr/lib/libvpx.so.4.
>
>  So, I guess you can try to download the source and try to rebuild it
>  yourself for the F25
>  environment.  :-)
>
>  --
>  You're Welcome Zachary Quinto
>  _______________________________________________
>  test mailing list -- test(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe send an email to test-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>