Problems with Broken RPM package

[Jim Cornette]

C.F. Scheidecker Antunes wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I have been updating this system from FC2 to FC3 and now to FC4.
> I've noticed that I have 2 versions of hal installed : 
> hal-0.4.6-1.FC3.i386  and hal-0.5.2-2.i386.
> Clearly a no-good situation. I get stuck on upgrading my machine 
> because of that.
>
> I've tried to remove it with both rpm and yum and got errors.
>
> I've tried to rebuild the rpm database as well, but the problem still 
> the same.
> How can I fix it?
>
> Thanks,
> C.F.
>
> Here's what happens when I run rpm and yum:
>
> rpm -e hal-0.4.6-1.FC3.i386
> error: %postun(hal-0.4.6-1.FC3.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 1
>
> for yum :
> ============================================================================= 
>
> Package                 Arch       Version          Repository        
> Size
> ============================================================================= 
>
> Removing:
> hal                     i386       0.4.6-1.FC3      installed         
> 359 k
>
> Transaction Summary
> ============================================================================= 
>
> Install      0 Package(s)
> Update       0 Package(s)
> Remove       1 Package(s)
> Total download size: 0
> Is this ok [y/N]: y
> Downloading Packages:
> Running Transaction Test
> Finished Transaction Test
> Transaction Test Succeeded
> Running Transaction
>  Removing  : hal                          ######################### [1/1]
> error: %postun(hal-0.4.6-1.FC3.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 1
>
> Removed: hal.i386 0:0.4.6-1.FC3
> Complete!
>
To ensure that the scriplet is bad and it is not related to security 
labeling of your system, try running 'setenforce 0' and try to remove 
the package via yum or rpm. If there is no difference and the scriptlet 
still fails, use the --noscripts and --justdb options to rpm on the 
package that you are trying to remove.
To ensure the newer version of hal on your system is intact, you might 
want to verify the package after the older version is removed.

I believe the error code is different than I encountered myself with a 
security labeling problem in SELinux.  It is harmless to try though first.

Jim

-- 
To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk.
		-- Thomas Edison