On Sat, 08 Feb 2014 13:08:13 -0800, Joe Zeff wrote:
> > # yum install 'libunique-1.0.so.0()(64bit)'
> >
>
> No, that won't work.
Just give it a try. ;-)
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/l
On 02/08/2014 12:22 PM, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 08/02/14 12:30, Michael Schwendt wrote:
# yum whatprovides libunique-1.0.so.0*
Loaded plugins: auto-update-debuginfo, langpacks, refresh-packagekit
unique-1.1.6-10.fc20.i686 : Single instance support for applic
On 08/02/14 12:30, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> This appears to be an exceptional case,
It has always been like that.
> I've done this many times and
> yum has always provided the 64 bit file or at least a file that works.
You likely confuse library package names with library file names
and wit
On 08/02/14 12:30, Frank Murphy wrote:
If you do not want or use i686 rpms,
Skype, grub-efi?
edit /etc/yum.conf
add in the following:
exclude=*i?86*
this will prevent yum returning 32bit matches.
dnf.conf should provide similar for dnf
___
Regards
Frank
That would kill some old applicati
On Sat, 08 Feb 2014 10:41:13 -0500, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
> ># yum install 'libunique-1.0.so.0()(64bit)'
> >…
> >
> >> > Is my
> >> > command wrong, that's what the rpm shows as a missing dependency so I
> >> > just try to yum install that?
> > Yes, it's wrong.;-)
> >
>
On Sat, 08 Feb 2014 08:30:15 -0500
"Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA" wrote:
> And notecase_pro-3.8.7-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm expects x86_64 so will not
> install!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bob
>
If you do not want or use i686 rpms,
Skype, grub-efi?
edit /etc/yum.conf
add in the following:
exclude=*i?86*
On 08/02/14 10:13, Michael Schwendt wrote:
Because you've _not_ asked for the x86_64 lib. That one is marked
differently in the packages:
# repoquery --whatprovides 'libunique-1.0.so.0()(64bit)'
unique-0:1.1.6-10.fc20.x86_64
# yum whatprovides 'libunique-1.0.so.0()(64bit)'Loaded plugi
On Sat, 08 Feb 2014 08:44:51 -0500, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
>
> On 08/02/14 08:36, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> >> > Am I missing something?
> > Yes. Why do you install an i686 library package manually like that?
> > If you want the x86_64 lib, you need to specify it correctly.
> Ex
On 08/02/14 08:36, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Am I missing something?
Yes. Why do you install an i686 library package manually like that?
If you want the x86_64 lib, you need to specify it correctly.
Exactly, that is my question, why is it installing the i686? Is my
command wrong, that's what t
On Sat, 08 Feb 2014 04:30:10 -0500, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
>
> I find Notecase Pro indispensable and it is one of the first things I
> install when setting up a new Fedora Linux system. I just installed
> Fedora-20 and Centos-6.5 on another computer and in both cases the rpm
On 08/02/14 07:04, Ahmad Samir wrote:
On 8 February 2014 11:30, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA
wrote:
I find Notecase Pro indispensable and it is one of the first
things I install when setting up a new Fedora Linux system. I just
installed Fedora-20 and Centos-6.5 on another c
On 8 February 2014 11:30, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA <
bobgood...@wildblue.net> wrote:
>
> I find Notecase Pro indispensable and it is one of the first things I
> install when setting up a new Fedora Linux system. I just installed
> Fedora-20 and Centos-6.5 on another computer and in both c
I find Notecase Pro indispensable and it is one of the first things I
install when setting up a new Fedora Linux system. I just installed
Fedora-20 and Centos-6.5 on another computer and in both cases the rpm
[notecase_pro-3.8.7-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm] would not run due to dependency
problems. Yum
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 13:27:53 +, Frank Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 14:22:28 +0100
> Martin Møller Skarbiniks Pedersen wrote:
>
> > 2. You have multiple architectures of wine-openal installed,
> > but yum can only see an upgrade for one of those
> > architectures.
>
>
> I'm g
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 14:22:28 +0100
Martin Møller Skarbiniks Pedersen wrote:
> 2. You have multiple architectures of wine-openal installed,
> but yum can only see an upgrade for one of those
> architectures.
I'm guessing option 2,
sort of in that both arches may not have hit the mirror
Hi,
After running yum update I got the message below.
I think I am some more hints how to solve this:
Thanks.
--> Finished Dependency Resolution
Error: Multilib version problems found. This often means that the root
cause is something else and multilib version checking is just
p
Am 13.12.2011 22:45, schrieb Joe Zeff:
> On 12/13/2011 01:03 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> if you are totally unsure install smaba with a root account
>
> Are you sure you didn't mean samba? If so, I'd not have any use for it
> because I run a Windows-free LAN, except
> for my sister's laptop, a
On 12/13/2011 01:03 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
if you are totally unsure install smaba with a root account
Are you sure you didn't mean samba? If so, I'd not have any use for it
because I run a Windows-free LAN, except for my sister's laptop, and I
never need to connect to it. If you're think
Am 13.12.2011 21:52, schrieb Joe Zeff:
> On 12/13/2011 12:17 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> sounds like something is messed by an interrupted upgrade
>> however "yum --releasever=16 reinstall fedora-release" should fix the
>> version-problem
>>
>
> Thanx! That got the repolist straight.
>
>> aft
Am 13.12.2011 21:52, schrieb Joe Zeff:
> On 12/13/2011 12:17 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> sounds like something is messed by an interrupted upgrade
>> however "yum --releasever=16 reinstall fedora-release" should fix the
>> version-problem
>>
>
> Thanx! That got the repolist straight.
>
>> aft
On 12/13/2011 12:17 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
sounds like something is messed by an interrupted upgrade
however "yum --releasever=16 reinstall fedora-release" should fix the
version-problem
Thanx! That got the repolist straight.
after that "package-cleanup --dupes" and "package-cleanup --pr
Am 13.12.2011 21:06, schrieb Joe Zeff:
> My desktop is now out of the ICU, but it's still not running the way it
> should. At best, it's convalescent. One
> of the problems is that unless I use --releasever=16 I can't update my
> system, even though /etc/fedora-release has
> the correct value
My desktop is now out of the ICU, but it's still not running the way it
should. At best, it's convalescent. One of the problems is that unless
I use --releasever=16 I can't update my system, even though
/etc/fedora-release has the correct value. This might be because all of
my repos are stil
On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 13:17 -0500, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Tony Foster writes:
>
> > I could use some help.
> > I updated to FC13 from FC11 using a new disc I added to system.
> > System now crashes and locks up when it goes into suspend state.
> > not responsive to keyboard or front panel of
Tony Foster writes:
I could use some help.
I updated to FC13 from FC11 using a new disc I added to system.
System now crashes and locks up when it goes into suspend state.
not responsive to keyboard or front panel of computer without hard
reset. When I boot FC11 all is still fine.
I tried to
I could use some help.
I updated to FC13 from FC11 using a new disc I added to system.
System now crashes and locks up when it goes into suspend state.
not responsive to keyboard or front panel of computer without hard
reset. When I boot FC11 all is still fine.
I tried to run update assuming th
26 matches
Mail list logo
