PDA

View Full Version : Dependency failure for kino from dries



sixsixeight
3rd October 2006, 08:38 PM
First post, gang. Please let me know if I should provide more or less information. Also please keep in mind that my experience and knowledge about Linux and Fedora Core are, shall we say, less than extensive.

I'm running Fedora Core 5. I have set up my computer(s) as per Stanton Finley's instructions. This adds the freshrpms and dries repositories (enabled by default) as well as the livna repository (disabled by default). I was unable to install kino with yum install kino as it fails with “Error: Missing Dependency: libx264.so.48.” Through various research, I have found that libx264.so.50 is provided by x264 in the dries repository. If I disable dries via --disablerepo dries the installation works as it then gets kino from freshrpms. I ran yum deplist kino with dries enabled and disabled (which ran against freshrpms) and compared the output of the two. The freshrpms version does not fail this dependency because it does not *have* this dependency. I wasn't finished digging.

I ran yum whatprovides libx264.so.\* and found that none of my default repositories (as per the Stanton Finley setup) have a package that provides libx264.so.48. The x264 package in the dries repository provides libx264.so.50 and x264 package in the freshrpms repository provides libx264.so.47. A search for libx264.so.48 at rpm.pbone.net with all distributions checked returns only packages for SuSE.

After I installed kino from freshrpms (yum --disablerepo dries install kino), I then ran yum install x264 which installed the x264 package (with libx264.so.50) from dries.

This brings up some questions. Why is a dependency from a package in the dries repository not satisfied by that repository? Why do two repositories that are associated with each other (dries and freshrpms) have two different versions of the same package, kino in this instance? Will kino work with the x264 codec since the two packages are from different repositories (freshrpms for kino and dries for x264)?

The ultimate goal of this process is to be able to save some TV programs I've recorded to DVD. Therefore, at this point, the x264 codec isn't really a necessity.

This message might come across as a complaint but that is in no way the case. I'm just trying to understand.

Thanks in advance to anyone who can shed any light on this.

Seve
3rd October 2006, 10:58 PM
Hello:
Dries does not support FC5
See this link for help with setting up your yum for FC5, it's for 32bit by default, however for the most part it is relevant to 64.

Seve

sixsixeight
4th October 2006, 05:15 PM
Seve,

There's no link in your post. Please post it again.

I'm confused as to your statement that “Dries does not support FC5.” At http://dries.ulyssis.org/rpm/ it states “3178 rpm packages and 2018 source rpm packages for Fedora Core 5 i386,” and the packages I'm referring to are described at http://dries.ulyssis.org/rpm/packages/kino/info.html as follows:

Fedora Core 5 for i386 (fc5-i386)
kino-0.9.2-1.fc5.rf.i386.rpm

And at http://dries.ulyssis.org/rpm/packages/x264/info.html

Fedora Core 5 for i386 (fc5-i386)
x264-0.0.0-0.2.20060917.fc5.rf.i386.rpm

What am I missing?

sixsixeight

Seve
5th October 2006, 05:47 PM
Seve,

There's no link in your post. Please post it again.

I'm confused as to your statement that “Dries does not support FC5.” At http://dries.ulyssis.org/rpm/ it states “3178 rpm packages and 2018 source rpm packages for Fedora Core 5 i386,” and the packages I'm referring to are described at http://dries.ulyssis.org/rpm/packages/kino/info.html as follows:

Fedora Core 5 for i386 (fc5-i386)
kino-0.9.2-1.fc5.rf.i386.rpm

And at http://dries.ulyssis.org/rpm/packages/x264/info.html

Fedora Core 5 for i386 (fc5-i386)
x264-0.0.0-0.2.20060917.fc5.rf.i386.rpm

What am I missing?

sixsixeight
Hello:
No you didn't miss anything ....what I typed as a response makes absolutely no sense. I am not sure what the heck happened :confused: .... I did not mean to post what I did .. sorry for any confusion. Dries is okay and you shouldn't have any problems with the rpm packages as yum should sort it out for you.

Seve

texasducod
7th October 2006, 05:57 AM
My box also gives the libx264.so.48 dependency error installing Kino with Yumex using stanton-finley.com instruction set, on two fresh F5 installs; so is there something Stanton missed? And I am getting frustrated with having to re-install everything over and over, I'm on my 5th fedora crash since version 3. I wish there was an easy way to backup "everything", not just my data; like the MS system restore does.

Video4Linux also has a dependency issue: Missing Dependency: xawtv is needed by package gv4l

xawtv is not available without using Livna.repo, which confilicts with my other repositories', and even when installed v4l does not run.

commonplace
7th October 2006, 09:48 PM
I also can't update Kino in FC5; it can't resolve the libx264.so.48 dependency. Any solution to this yet?

texasducod
11th October 2006, 12:07 AM
Is there anybody with a clue how to fix this???

jjthomas
16th October 2006, 11:47 AM
I'm not sure if this helps, I found it with google/linux searching with the search words kino libx264
http://lists.rpmforge.net/pipermail/users/2006-September/000369.html

Anthony Messina wrote:
> --> Processing Dependency: libx264.so.48 for package: kino
> --> Finished Dependency Resolution
> Error: Missing Dependency: libx264.so.48 is needed by package kino
>
> i had to exclude x264 to update.
>
>
Disable the greysector repository, remove libx264, and then reinstall
libx264. The version numbers for libx264 are very different between
greysector and rpmforge.

I plan to instal kino myself but have to iron out some Smaba problems first. ...back to google :)

-JJ

texasducod
16th October 2006, 05:26 PM
I found that one too but don't know what greysector is unless you mean my brain and I dont want to mess with that so should I give up on the kino fedora 5 thing?