On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 22:30 +0100, Marco Pizzoli wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:18 PM, John Dennis <jden...@redhat.com>
> wrote:
>         On 02/10/2012 03:49 PM, Marco Pizzoli wrote:
>                 --> Finished Dependency Resolution
>                 *Error: Protected multilib versions:
>                 libldb-1.1.0-1.fc16.i686 !=
>                 libldb-1.1.4-1.fc16.1.x86_64*
>         This error is because you've got both a 32-bit and 64-bit
>         version of libldb installed, note how the 32-bit version is
>         1.1.0 and the 64-bit version is 1.1.4, they're not the same.
> Actually I think the situation is a little bit different. 
> To explain myself better I start by posting this output:
> [root@freeipa02 ~]# rpm -qa|grep libldb
> libldb-1.1.0-1.fc16.x86_64
> Look for a second at the output i posted before. As you can see 
> [cut]
> --> Running transaction check
> ---> Package libldb.i686 0:1.1.0-1.fc16 will be installed
> [cut]
> The package libldb-32bit is being submitted to yum as a candidate from
> a dependence on a package situated in your ipa-devel repository. 
> I'm not a yum expert, can you confirm what I notice?
>         However the ipa-devel repo does have both the 32-bit and
>         64-bit version of 1.1.4 available in the x86-64 repo
>         ipa-devel/fedora/16/x86_64/os/libldb-1.1.4-1.fc16.1.i686.rpm
>         ipa-devel/fedora/16/x86_64/os/libldb-1.1.4-1.fc16.1.x86_64.rpm
>         So the repo looks good, not sure what yum is complaining
>         about, it should see both 32-bit and 64-bit is available for
>         version 1.1.4 and install both, unless of course you've got a
>         dependency on the 1.1.0 32-bit version, but yum should tell
>         you that.
>         That's about as much help as I can give you at the moment.

You're right. I see what's happening. SSSD is built with an explicit LDB
dependency. So because it's keeping SSSD at 1.6.4 for you, it's trying
to hang on to libldb 1.1.0 from the regular repos (which is

The real question here is why it's not pulling in the latest SSSD bits.
And the answer to that is because we're currently having issues where
not all of the SSSD subpackages are ending up in the repo. So yum is
trying its best with what it has (which doesn't line up).

We're working on this. We'll have it fixed by sometime on Monday, I'm

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Freeipa-users mailing list

Reply via email to