[SOLVED] A mystery: RPM says no package requires something that is required.
Linux - SoftwareThis forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
that is again insufficient information. I can only guess, but probably those packages are not the official rpms of that release (just some hand-made whatever).
Would be much better to tell us the name of those packages, your os, your configured repositories and other related information, otherwise you will get no better answer just something like: try to remove pkg-ert first and install pkg-fgh.
The packages are made by my company's developers. I am simply trying to understand how a condition could arise in which RPM would both confirm and deny the existence of such dependencies.
It might be that pkg-abc requires something that is provided by pkg-xyz, but does not explicitly require pky-xyz itself. You can see the list of what pkg-xyz provides by running "rpm -q --provides pkg-xyz" and match that against what pkg-abc requires ("rpm -q --requires pkg-abc").
I thought of that too, but the package in question requires "ImageMagick >= 6.7.7"
That is different from requiring "ImageMagick". Yes, it is quite unlikely that a package other than ImageMagick would provide capability "ImageMagick >= 6.7.7", but the syntax doesn't make that distinction.
What Linux release are you running? I wonder if this is a case of a "soft dependency", i.e. a package that is recommended to provide additiional features but is not a hard requirement. Since AFAIK RHEL is not using that yet, I'm guessing you are running into this in a recent Fedora.
if you have been using rpm to install odd things that are not in the cent repos
then it is likely you have a mess on your hands
not quite a "Frankenstein" install but a mess
imagemagick can be a royal pain sometimes
there is the Q8 ,the Q16 and the custom Q32 ( i use the q16 and q32 with a custom install )
matlab/octave needs the q32 and nip needs the q16 and other things need the q8
if these rpm's are from your developers then have them AGREE on using one version or at least the SAME version that is in the cent repos
imagemagick is NOTORIOUS!!!!! for having an EVEN MORE BUGGY NEW VERSION!!@!!!!!
have your developers use the default IM if at all possible
It's not just ImageMagick it's the entire dep list of the package. Something is fishy about how it's built perhaps.
FWIW, I agree with you on using the released versions. It's just not my decision.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.