Yum dependencies [still]

[Bill Perkins]

M. Lewis wrote:
> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 02:12 -0500, M. Lewis wrote:
>>
>>> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 12:06 +1100, Steffen Kluge wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 22:44 -0500, M. Lewis wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Error: Missing Dependency: nvidia-glx = 0:1.0.7676 is needed by 
>>>>>> package kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.13-1.1532_FC4
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The root cause of this issue is that kernel and kernel module packages
>>>>> can exist in multiple versions on the same system, since they live in
>>>>> versioned directories and have no conflicting files. Other packages
>>>>> (like nvidia-glx) cannot have multiple versions installed at the same
>>>>> time. If you want to use the latest kernel with NVidia's proprietary
>>>>> driver you have to wave your old NVidia kernel modules good-bye. That
>>>>> means no proprietary NVidia driver support when you boot older 
>>>>> kernels.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nobody's fault, really. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I disagree - It's basically livna's fault. They ought to rebuild
>>>> kernel-module-nvidia for all kernels currently being used.
>>>>
>>>> Otherwise, users will not be able to update.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The only way out would be convincing someone to
>>>>> build the NVidia modules against x number of older kernels, as well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Exactly.
>>>>
>>>> Ralf
>>>
>>>
>>> I really don't care whose fault it might be.
>>
>>
>>
>> It actually is quite simple: Current livna's packaging/update strategy
>> puts the rpm dependencies into an inconsistent state, i.e. this is a
>> packaging bug.
>>
>>
>>> If you're going to provide an update, then the update should be 
>>> complete, with any dependencies required.
>>
>>
>> Yes. Fact is, livna's strategies breaks this rule.
>>
>>
>>> I'm not glued to a given kernel. I could really care less what kernel 
>>> I run as long as it is stable.
>>
>>
>>
>>> My issue is I have probably over 100 updates to other packages that 
>>> will no update due to these one or two stupid dependencies. It would 
>>> seem that the packagers of yum, uptodate, or whatever, would allow 
>>> the other packages whose dependencies *are* resolved to be updated.
>>
>>
>> Agreed, but again, the dependencies can not be resolved, because livna's
>> packaging strategy is broken. So all installers (yum etc.) can do is to
>> try to find a reasonable compromise that doesn't destroy your system,
>> i.e. not to update it.
>> Ralf
>>
>>
> 
> But what I'm saying is all the other 100 or more packages *could* be 
> updated. The ones that do *not* have dependencies. Upgrade them and wait 
> until the others dependencies are resolved.
> 
> M
> 

Coming from Slackware for many years, I had few problems with updates 
and such- I recompiled most apps from source when they broke after an 
update. Is this an option? (sorry for coming out of left field on this)

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The two most common things in the	| Bill Perkins
  universe are Hydrogen and Stupidity."	| perk at iag.net
					| programmer-at-large
		F. Zappa		| ALL assembly languages done here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------