On 18/5/25 22:07, Greg Troxel wrote:
Eyal Lebedinsky <[email protected]> writes:
I am upgrading to f42.
I get this failure doing "dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=42"
2025-05-17T21:13:37+1000 CRITICAL Error: Transaction test error:
file /usr/bin/rhino conflicts between attempted installs of
rhino-1.7.14-14.fc42.noarch and nut-2.8.3-1.fc42.x86_64
Both packages contain a file with the same name.
Is this problem being dealt with?
By who? I am unaware of it being raised here.
What is the recommended way of dealing with this issue? I DO need 'nut' but do
not know if I need 'rhino'.
Trying my mind-reading skills, seeing "f42" and "dnf", I would guess you
are using a packaging-system/GNU/Linux distribution "Fedora" :-)
But seriously, it looks like you are running into a Fedora packaging
issue, not a nut issue. I suggest you report this to Fedora.
I raised it on the fedora users list and then created
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2267022
and it seems to progress from there.
I raised it on Nut-upsuser last as I thought they added this file.
It was also in f40 but the two were in /usr/bin vs /usr/sbin and the f42 merge
led to this conflict now.
It doesn't make sense to have /usr/bin/rhino in a package.
So you are saying that the driver is not part of nut, and it is fedora that
included it in the package,
but in the wrong way/place.
Do I understand it correctly?
Looking at
the nut packages in pkgsrc, I find:
ups-nut/PLIST:libexec/nut/rhino
ups-nut/PLIST:man/man8/rhino.8
and rhino(8) says this is a driver:
NAME
rhino - Driver for Brazilian Microsol RHINO UPS equipment
as opposed to some javascript package. I think rhino is new in 2.8.3.
nut's recommended build approach puts drivers in $prefix/libexec/nut, or
at least that's how pkgsrc does it.
--
Eyal at Home ([email protected])
_______________________________________________
Nut-upsuser mailing list
[email protected]
https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsuser
