Heads up! Broken deps in Upgrade from 12 to 13
braden at endoframe.com
Sun Feb 21 04:34:39 UTC 2010
On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 20:20 -0800, Conrad Meyer wrote:
> On Saturday 20 February 2010 06:03:28 pm Braden McDaniel wrote:
> > I guess I should properly read the headings... I guess I misunderstood
> > where this was going from your summary.
> > If I understand it correctly, it's telling me that a F12 that hasn't
> > been updated will have problems being upgraded to F13. Certainly that's
> > not ideal; but it doesn't strike me as exactly tragic, either. How
> > important is this considered, generally?
> > I'm not crystal clear on why this is broken, either. It may have
> > something to do with the fact that the openvrml binary RPM changed to
> > being a metapackage; but the implication of Boost is a bit confounding.
> The ratio of "badness" to the difficulty of fixing it is fairly high. Fixing
> it is fairly trivial. Leaving it broken breaks upgrades for users who upgrade
> distributions using yum update -- which, though it isn't supported, is
> reasonably common.
I'm happy to fix it if I can figure out what's broken.
> The solution varies somewhat depending on how broken it is; I'll try to
> describe all possible problems / solutions. There's going to be a lot of text
> here, but nothing hard to do.
> If the F-12 package has a higher Epoch than the F-13 package, this is *very*
> broken, but can be fixed by bumping the F-13 Epoch to at least the F-12 Epoch.
That's not it.
> If the F-12 package has a higher Version than the F-13 package and the same
> Epoch, this is probably broken.
Also not it.
> If the F-12 package has the same-or-lower Epoch and the same version, but a
> higher Release, then a couple things may be wrong:
> I think that's everything. Let me know if you have any questions, or if I'm
> wrong ;).
I'm afraid I'm still at a loss.
Braden McDaniel <braden at endoframe.com>
More information about the devel