yum and gecko-libs prob - Page 3

cmorris · #31 19th July 2008, 11:40 AM

Yea but using --nodeps will not remove anything but that package. So if you remove just xulrunner and put it back in nothing will be lost. As long as you make sure you have --nodeps.

leigh123linux · #32 19th July 2008, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorris

Yea but using --nodeps will not remove anything but that package. So if you remove just xulrunner and put it back in nothing will be lost. As long as you make sure you have --nodeps.

If you executed this command your whole system would cease to function properly ( it also nukes rpm and yum ) !

Code:

rpm -e --nodeps glibc

JN4OldSchool · #33 19th July 2008, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M4rc0

I just waited a day and it update now normally.

Didn't do anything

glad to see there are still one or two sane people left using Fedora!

This happens every time....

RonPolley · #34 19th July 2008, 05:58 PM

That's my point, with Fedora being looked at as THE FREE LINUX to have,not a downstream OS, these things souldn't even happen in the first place unless you want to be similar to Microsoft in that respect.

JN4OldSchool · #35 19th July 2008, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RonPolley

That's my point, with Fedora being looked at as THE FREE LINUX to have,not a downstream OS, these things souldn't even happen in the first place unless you want to be similar to Microsoft in that respect.

All Linux is free! Even RHEL, case in point, that is what centOS is. The source code is open. Downstream means refined. Being a TESTING DISTRO fedora has always been a little rough. That is what fedora is. This incident was a mistake in one package, xulrunner, that slipped through. It happens. If you want dead stable then I will say the same thing that got me in trouble yesterday. Use debian! I am much more concerned about things like keeping my wireless working then i am about having to wait a day for a couple updates that were screwed up. You are awful quick to compare to Microsoft, why? How much do you pay for Vista? If this happened with Vista, which I am sure things do happen, then, as a PAYING customer, you have every right to be upset. Even then though, what are you going to do? Switch to Linux? Lol! Fedora is a free testing distro, even though some things can be upsetting at times, even to me, it is what it is. All the bluster in the world about "it is a disgrace, it shouldnt happen, I am going elsewhere, this will cause Fedora to lose all its users and eventually fail because only 1 person will put up with this stuff..." will not change things. But, what really gets me, and the reason why I am so vocal about this instead of just quietly laughing at the mentality and moving on to the next thread, is because this incident was so irrelevant! More than one person told you to just sit tight, it will be fixed tomorrow. Sure enough, it was fixed. Life goes on. Till next time anyway...

juanfgs · #36 19th July 2008, 07:37 PM

I solved this uninstalling gnome-python2-gtkmozembed (no deps where removed), I should read this post before (I didn't know that I could do --skip-broken).

Quote:

Originally Posted by djgemz

It's a free OS what are you complaining about mistro, if you can do better do it! I don't see a C compiler certification under your belt, or your keyboard at that matter! If you don't like it don't slam the people that "DEVOTE" their time to coding for the community! Nuf said and go on over and talk to Bill Gates about how shi@#y his OS is!

Even when I agree with what you say, I think that would be better to test this kind of things before or roll back the changes if there are errors reported by the community (until a fix is provided). However probably the devs are doing the best they can.

djgemz · #37 20th July 2008, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by juanfgs

Even when I agree with what you say, I think that would be better to test this kind of things before or roll back the changes if there are errors reported by the community (until a fix is provided). However probably the devs are doing the best they can.

Only human, we all make mistakes period! But yeah a bit of thorough testing wouldn't hurt, but still I overlook the small stuff but when it comes to pretty much bashing the coders that devote their time on the side to roll out updates, patches or whatever it is... I'm a step in

leadgolem · #38 20th July 2008, 03:58 AM

Since this has been a moderately irritating issue on my system for a few days I thought I would take a crack at it. This is what I did.

Code:

su
rpm -e --nodeps xulrunner
yum install xulrunner
yum update

Worked like a charm. For those to impatient to wait for it to be fixed.

cmorris · #39 20th July 2008, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leigh123@linux

If you executed this command your whole system would cease to function properly ( it also nukes rpm and yum ) !

Code:

rpm -e --nodeps glibc

This is true, but I'm not asking to remove a need package. I'm looking at xulrunner. Which I would never tell someone to do, unless I tried it first. Which is a good thing about the message boards. If I try to tell someone to do something stupid to crash there system. The whole community would be on me in a sec

nt4cats · #40 21st July 2008, 12:08 PM

I'm still broken. In order to get the updates to install I removed:

nspluginwrapper.i386
gtkmozembedmm
nspluginwrapper.x86_64
gtkmozembedmm-devel

I just re-installed the two nspluginwrapper packages, but I can't get the other two. I'm not sure why I need them (I think I may have installed them when I was playing with the Google Gadgets) ... but they still show the same dependency problem.

Code:

[root@cylon ~]# yum install gtkmozembedmm gtkmozembedmm-devel
Loaded plugins: presto, refresh-packagekit
Setting up and reading Presto delta metadata
No Presto metadata available for livna
No Presto metadata available for fedora
No Presto metadata available for updates
Excluding Packages in global exclude list
Finished
Setting up Install Process
Parsing package install arguments
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
---> Package gtkmozembedmm.x86_64 0:1.4.2.cvs20060817-20.fc9 set to be updated
--> Processing Dependency: gecko-libs = 1.9 for package: gtkmozembedmm
---> Package gtkmozembedmm-devel.x86_64 0:1.4.2.cvs20060817-20.fc9 set to be updated
--> Finished Dependency Resolution
gtkmozembedmm-1.4.2.cvs20060817-20.fc9.x86_64 from updates has depsolving problems
  --> Missing Dependency: gecko-libs = 1.9 is needed by package gtkmozembedmm-1.4.2.cvs20060817-20.fc9.x86_64 (updates)
Error: Missing Dependency: gecko-libs = 1.9 is needed by package gtkmozembedmm-1.4.2.cvs20060817-20.fc9.x86_64 (updates)

#41 21st July 2008, 12:53 PM

Quote:

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/upda...-2.19.1-17.fc9 It would be helpful if people would try these out and give the appropriate +1 vote in bodhi if they suffice.

that was posted by Paul Freilds in the Fedora-Devel-List .. so people might wanna try those as suggested

anonymouse · #42 21st July 2008, 03:33 PM

Everything seems to be fixed now. After a "yum clean all" mid-morning London time, the updates all applied cleanly and without errors. Now posting from Firefox 3.0.1. :-)

mark-b · #43 22nd July 2008, 12:14 AM

Transaction Check Error:
package xulrunner-1.9-1.fc9.x86_64 (which is newer than xulrunner-1.9-0.60.beta5.fc9.i386) is already installed

Fedora 9 x86_64 still tries to install an older beta version. I suppose I'll just wait till this is fixed. If i really want to get ambitious, i'll remove xulrunner --nodep

scottro · #44 22nd July 2008, 03:06 AM

On a rawhide 64 bit, doing the rpm -e --nodeps xulrunner (for two different versions that had been installed, probably because this is 64 bit), then doing the yum install xulrunner seems to have fixed the missing gecko-libs issue for me.

null_pointer_us · #45 22nd July 2008, 03:40 PM

My problems were gone the next time I tried to update.

Maybe not all the update mirrors have the corrected packages?