Hi, On Thu, Dec 30, 2004 at 10:18:14PM +0100, Hugo van der Kooij wrote: > On Thu, 30 Dec 2004, David Highley wrote: > > "Hugo van der Kooij wrote:" > > > > On Thu, 2004-12-30 at 21:10 +0100, Hugo van der Kooij wrote: > > > > > The yum package published has 2 issues. > > > > > 1. It contains a weird Requires: line which breaks dependencies. > > > > > 2. It requires python 2.4 that is not part of the stable tree (yet) > > > > > so > > > > > this dependency can not be resolved. > > > > > > > > Is that the yum package from atrpms or from Fedora that has these > > > > problems? > > > > > > atrpms. bug 350 if I am not mistaken. > > > > So is the bug against the RedHat Fedora version or the atrpms apt. If > > you are using yum will you be effected as I see tons of dependency > > issues when I search the atrpms repositories. > > For those that need glasses or hearing aids I will repeat myself again: > atrpms > > I think it has been named by others as well several times. You can even > see the problem on: > http://download.atrpms.net/production/sources/fedora-3-i386/atrpms/yum.spec
The issues David Highley mentions (many broken dependencies) are not due to the double Requires: typo. They are genouine yum bugs :/ The yum package at ATrpms was supposed to provide a newer yum fixing some of these bugs, but got bugged itself with the problems Hugo mentions. So there is a conspiracy against yum users. Seriously yum is quite messy these days, so unless you have a multilib system better go for apt. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
pgp5mBQw9BGGG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mythtv-users mailing list [email protected] http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
