Bingo !! Yep that is obviously the issue extent.
Bob On Wednesday 30 July 2003 02:08 am, Levi Ramsey wrote: > First of all, please do not post with Reply-To: set... > > On Wed Jul 30 2:05 +0200, lolomin wrote: > > answer, but i'm always amazed of this ( in a precedent message you were > > also advising to upgrade perl-URPM manually to solve failure of urpmi > > while upgrading some packages ) > > Generally in those cases, you can upgrade perl-URPM and urpmi with > urpmi. I've yet to see a case where that failed. > > > What is the meaning of urpmi if we have to upgrade manually every week > > at least one package and by the way find which package we have to > > upgrade ( because that's never a simple thing for the "normal user" to > > find the one that makes trouble when you got 2 pages of rpm dependencies > > errors saying kdebase is absent e.g when this one is really there !! > > > > :o( ) ? > > The main problems at the moment involve broken rpm autogenerated > dependencies. To be completely honest, I think that auto-deps are a bad > idea; the situation wasn't that bad before, right now it's worse, and I > don't think I see an improvement on that front on the horizon (the fact > that the perl checker still generates bogus dependencies like perl(the) > because one of the source files has a comment like "use the Foo widget > to..." makes this point abundantly clear). At the very least, auto-deps > should be removed until right after 9.2 is released and then brought > back when there's enough time to get them reasonably working.
