Yum packages (again)

Da Rock rock_on_the_web at comcen.com.au
Mon Feb 25 03:36:30 UTC 2008

Ok, I know a little of this has been covered before, but I have some new
info after some exhaustive debugging.

After the feedback regarding the repo conflicts, I decided to resolve
this once and for all. I uninstalled all mplayer, x264 and xine
packages, and reinstalled only the livna versions.

This produced mixed results. Firstly, Yum reported the packages
installed. When you go back and check what is installed (version, etc)
it stated that the freshrpms versions were installed- but only some. So
I ended up with some livna and some freshrpms, despite the fact that I
selected only livna packages to be installed.

So I uninstalled it all again. This time I went to the livna site and
downloaded and installed them manually. Now it came up and said
installed, but some codecs weren't installing due to a missing
libx264.so.56. I checked again what was installed and what provided
x264- livna was installed.

This seemed very confusing to me, so I physically checked the contents
of the rpm. The livna package did contain the library file
libx264.so.56- so why didn't the livna package repo recognise its own

I also checked the freshrpms version, and this contained libx264.so.58.
Technically then, Yum shouldn't be declaring that libx264.so.56 is
contained in the freshrpms file, and the 2 versions shouldn't conflict,
should they?

So I put it to all- what the hell is going on here? Neither repo appears
to be able to declare what the packages ACTUALLY provide, and Yum is
getting very confused. So who's fault is it? Where does the
responsibility lie?

More information about the fedora-list mailing list