Dealing with 94 rpmnew files on new FC4 install after yum update

[Roger]

Paul Howarth wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 05:19 -0700, Roger wrote:
>   
>> Paul Howarth wrote:
>>     
>>> On Thu, 2006-05-04 at 15:13 -0700, Roger wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> I have just installed FC4 on a new PC and ran yum update.  The yum 
>>>> update created 94 .rpmnew files.  Most of these end with .conf.rpmnew 
>>>> and the others end with /config/xxxxx.rpmnew.
>>>>
>>>> I understand these to be application configuration files that were not 
>>>> installed by yum because there may have been local customizations.  In 
>>>> normal circumstances, I should review each .rpmnew file against its 
>>>> counterpart and determine if if the configuration files can be swapped 
>>>> by renaming or if the .rpmnew file must first be edited.  However, at 
>>>> least a few of the .rpmnew files seem to be binary and I do not know the 
>>>> function of each application that has an .rpmnew file.
>>>>
>>>> Because this is a new installation (I have customized my monitor 
>>>> settings and made a static IP address), a guess is that I just want all 
>>>> the .rpmnew files installed -- and maybe the existing files renamed to 
>>>> .rpmold just in case.  Is there an installation option that I missed or 
>>>> is there a cleanup script somewhere to deal with this problem?  Would 
>>>> use of smart (or apt) instead of yum have resulted in fewer problems?
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Are you by any chance using x86_64 and are many of these files
>>> associated with packages that you have both .x86_64 and .i386 versions
>>> installed? A common cause of spurious .rpmnew file generation is when
>>> multiple packages own the same config file (as is the case described
>>> above, and also for example /etc/vimrc).
>>>
>>> Paul.
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>> Yes, I am using x86_64 and the rpmnew files seem to be consistent with 
>> packages that have .i386 versions.  I tried removing a few 
>> (alsa-lib.i386, apr.i386, and SDL.i386) and yum showed no dependencies 
>> and removed them.  When I entered a remove command for the x86_64 
>> counterparts, yum showed many dependencies so I did not remove them. 
>>
>> So now the question is why do I have these .386 versions and is it a 
>> good idea to remove them all?
>>     
>
> I suspect they were installed by anaconda but other than that I can't
> say much; I don't currently have an x86_64 box myself so I'm not up on
> the gory details of what's needed and what's not.
>
>   
>> I should note that I am trying to install MythTV and after the initial 
>> yum update I added atrpms as a yum repository.  atrpms seems to be a bit 
>> flakey (sometimes there and sometimes not), but I think all the rpmnew 
>> files predated my adding atrpms as a repository.  I could do a clean 
>> install again to verify that as I am having trouble getting lirc to 
>> install correctly.
>>     
>
> What problems are you having exactly?
>
> Paul.
>
>   
My root problem is my ATI remote does not work, probably because "dmesg 
| grep lirc" yields a message 'lirc_dev: no version for "struct_module" 
found: kernel tainted'. I think this is because the lirc-devices.noarch 
version installed is 0.7.0-1;  lirc and lirc-lib are versions 0.8.1.  
lirc-kmdl is version 2.6.16 matching my 2.6.16 kernel.

The above is after I removed lirc (and MythTV along with it), and then 
reinstalled both.  Prior to that I had the same modules installed plus 
lirc and lirc-devel versions 0.7.2-1 installed.    

I have been following the MythTV installation doc at 
http://wilsonet.com/mythtv/fcmyth.php and the ATI Remote doc at 
http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/index.php/ATI_Remote_Wonder_II. 

-----
Alex, thanks for the note -- I have had no trouble accessing atrpms 
today, as I recall my prior problems were limited to early evenings and 
weekends.

Roger