Missing dependency already installed

[John5342]

On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 19:36, Mohammed Morsi <mmorsi at redhat.com> wrote:
> Howdy,
>    I've been scratching my head over this problem for the last few days and
> figured it was time to get some help.
>
> I'm trying to build Ruby on Rails v2.3.8 against Fedora 13 but am running
> into dependency issues. Namely the 'rubygem-activerecord' package (rails is
> simple a collection of this and a few other active*/action* packages) pulls
> in the 'rubygem-activesupport' package of the same version, but yum is
> failing to find it, even though it is installed. Ergo it results in this
> error:
>
> yum install --nogpgcheck ruby-activerecord-2.3.8-3.fc13.noarch.rpm
> Loaded plugins: presto, refresh-packagekit
> Setting up Install Process
> Examining ruby-activerecord-2.3.8-3.fc13.noarch.rpm:
> ruby-activerecord-2.3.8-3.fc13.noarch
> Marking ruby-activerecord-2.3.8-3.fc13.noarch.rpm to be installed
> Resolving Dependencies
> --> Running transaction check
> ---> Package ruby-activerecord.noarch 0:2.3.8-3.fc13 set to be updated
> --> Processing Dependency: rubygem-activesupport = 2.3.8 for package:
> ruby-activerecord-2.3.8-3.fc13.noarch
> --> Finished Dependency Resolution
> Error: Package: ruby-activerecord-2.3.8-3.fc13.noarch
> (/ruby-activerecord-2.3.8-3.fc13.noarch)
>            Requires: rubygem-activesupport = 2.3.8
>            Installed: 1:rubygem-activesupport-2.3.8-1.fc13.noarch
> (@/rubygem-activesupport-2.3.8-1.fc13.noarch)
>            Available: 1:rubygem-activesupport-2.3.5-1.fc13.noarch (fedora)
>  You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem
>  You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest
>
> Note how it says 'rubygem-activesupport = 2.3.8' is required while
> rubygem-activesupport-2.3.8-1.fc13.noarch is installed. This is happening
> both on a stock F13 install and against mock setup to pull packages from
> Fedora and from a yum repo w/ the
> "rubygem-activesupport-2.3.8-1.fc13.noarch" package in it.
>
> What could be the cause of this problem? Is it something that can easily be
> resolved? (without using the --skip-broken flag preferably)

rubygem-activesupport has recently had it's epoch bumped and i would
imagine the requires in rubygem-activerecord simply hasn't been
updated to match.

-- 
There are 10 kinds of people in the world: Those who understand binary
and those who don't...