update

Qualimax · 09-21-2007, 05:45 AM

Trying to follow the update announcement in Fedora c6 for 4 packages
updates available for XML-commons etc. the update fails. Failed dependencies state xml-commons= 0:1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10 to be missing. It is not missing but the name is slightly different, the = fails. So I ask for looking into and if necessary debugging the update. I am looking for the person who is able to judge, and if necessary to debug the new updates jdom, velocity, xerces-j2 and xml-commons.

Qualimax

Simon Bridge · 09-21-2007, 07:33 AM

what do you mean "the = fails"?

su -c yum upgrade xml-commons

of course, you could remove the package then install the exact one.

f8 coming soon, you'll need the new distro.

Qualimax · 09-22-2007, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simon Bridge

what do you mean "the = fails"?

su -c yum upgrade xml-commons

of course, you could remove the package then install the exact one.

f8 coming soon, you'll need the new distro.

Simon, I removed the package and re-installed. The problem is that on resolving dependencies it gives the error, and in details it says: missing dependency: xml-commons = 0:1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10 is needed by package xml-commons-apis.

The file installed by package xml-commons-apis is
xml-commons-1.3.02-0.b2.7pp.10.i386.rpm

You see the slight difference at the beginning of the file, ie = 0: instead of -

I guess this is the cause of the failed dependency.

I sought for the file xml-commons = 0:1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10 in the repositories but could not find it.

KS

Simon Bridge · 09-22-2007, 09:50 PM

You've misunderstood.

The = sign means that the required package must be that exact version. As opposed to:
xml-commons > 1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10 ... see?

xml-commons-0:1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10 is needed
xml-commons-1.3.02-0.b2.7pp.10 is what you have

This is weird... did you copy and paste or is there a typo?

However, you are not the only one with this sort of problem...
https://www.zarb.org/pipermail/jpack...st/011762.html
... read through that thread.

I'd be tempted to uninstall your xml-commons and explicitly install it again by spelling out the full name.

wmakowski · 09-23-2007, 03:50 PM

To me this looks like a bug in the rpm. Strange I didn't encounter the same problem when I updated FC6. The 0: should not be part of the version-release string. I did not see it reported on bugzilla, but it seems pretty obvious to me that is the problem. I performed a rpm -qR xml-commons-apis on my system and it showed the same dependency.

Code:

[makowski@gandalf ~]$ rpm -qR xml-commons-apis
/bin/sh
/bin/sh
java-gcj-compat>= 1.0.31
java-gcj-compat>= 1.0.31
libc.so.6
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3)
libdl.so.2
libgcc_s.so.1
libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)
libgcj_bc.so.1
libm.so.6
libpthread.so.0
librt.so.1
libz.so.1
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rtld(GNU_HASH)
xml-commons = 0:1.3.02-0.b2.7jpp.10

It is also interesting to note that Fedora 7 doesn't have this dependency. It looks like they reorganized the packages and made xml-commons a part of xml-commons-apis.

Bill

Simon Bridge · 09-24-2007, 03:00 AM

So report it as a bug?
I have seen that 0: as part of a filename in other posts - though I, too, was skeptical. Possibly removing the old package entirely, then reinstalling after the update, will get the newer configuration installed?

Of course - it could still be a typo...

chrism01 · 09-24-2007, 04:06 AM

I found that that the xerces rpm seemed to be the root cause, so I ignored that update for a while.
Eventually, they seemd to fix it and it all loaded in (otherwise if i tried to remove xml-common it wanted to remove the whole of Open Office grrrrr).
Currently I'm having a similar prob with the 'velocity' update. I'm going to ignore that for as long as poss unless someone has a definite 'fix' to load it.
I'm a bit miffed though, given this is a stock FC6 with only their updates. I haven't customised the system, so the auto-updates ought to work 1st time.
Be nice if they did some testing before releasing this stuff.

wmakowski · 09-24-2007, 01:52 PM

My FC6 system is for the most part stock too. I'm still not sure why I did not have issues during update. Do you have any other yum repositories that could be conflicting? What messages are you getting with the velocity update? I'm also curious what versions are repoted when you enter rpm -qa | grep xml-commons.

My thoughts would be to report this as a bug. I had a dependency issue from a standard package once before. It was caused by incorrect entries in the rpm and the Fedora folks took care of it. I was actually able to do a work around before the fix by installing packages in a certain sequence. However, in this case I'm not sure if it is possible to go that route.

Bill

Qualimax · 10-21-2007, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmakowski

My FC6 system is for the most part stock too. I'm still not sure why I did not have issues during update. Do you have any other yum repositories that could be conflicting? What messages are you getting with the velocity update? I'm also curious what versions are repoted when you enter rpm -qa | grep xml-commons.

My thoughts would be to report this as a bug. I had a dependency issue from a standard package once before. It was caused by incorrect entries in the rpm and the Fedora folks took care of it. I was actually able to do a work around before the fix by installing packages in a certain sequence. However, in this case I'm not sure if it is possible to go that route.

Bill

The problem I had was caused by the Jpackage.repo.
Disabling it solved the problem. I thank Kam Leo for his help.
KS (Qualimax)