mutt and squid, removed because of dep problems, errors
Sandy Pond
sandy_pond at myrealbox.com
Wed Mar 17 15:15:13 UTC 2004
On Wed, 2004-03-17 at 07:42 -0500, Jim Cornette wrote:
> Removing packages that have dep problems, is by no means a solution for
> resolving conflicts, with other programs. I don't think doing a nodep is
> a good practice either.
This is really a custom situation that depends on many things.
> For nautilus-media removal, it was more of a test to satisfy other media
> applications and on Sandy's detective work on pinning down
> nautilus-media as the offending application.
This is real easy if you use "yum provides <file>" and "yum list
<package>" after a dependency failure. Maybe yum could do a better job
of doing an automatic "provide" and "list" when it encounters a
dependency problem.
> If this wasn't a test process and things weren't changing so quickly. It
> would be better to submit a bug for the problems encountered. However,
> without the postings related to the conflicts, it is hard for people to
> know what is really going on. One problem, many solutions.
>
This is really a custom situation that depends on many things.
>
> Regarding the mutt and squid conflict. I use mutt and don't think that I
> use squid. Removing this program was with much hesitation.
>
Case in point.
:)
More information about the fedora-test-list
mailing list