Missing lib

satimis · 08-28-2006, 06:39 AM

Hi Lenard

Ran;
# yum remove yum-2.6.0-1

Code:

....
.........
Removed: yum.noarch 0:2.6.0-1
Complete!

Re
rpm -Uvh system-config-display*.rpm system-config-display-gui*.rpm --force

packages:-
system-config-display*
system-config-display-gui*

can't be found on;
http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pu...ates/5/x86_64/

Whether you meant following packages;

system-config-printer-0.6.151.8-1.x86_64.rpm
system-config-printer-gui-0.6.151.7-1.x86_64.rpm
system-config-printer-gui-0.6.151.8-1.x86_64.rpm

Shall I install the older version "system-config-printer-gui-0.6.151.7-1.x86_64.rpm" as well?

Quote:

If your running in a mixed mode environment with both 32-bit and 64-bit applications and libs then you need to watch out for multilib problems. This happens when one does not keep the x86 and x86_64 libs at the same revision level.

Yes I'm running both 32-bit and 64-bit applications and libs. What shall I do?

TIA

B.R.
satimis

Lenard · 08-28-2006, 08:16 AM

Get the list of the system-config-printer installed packages and remove all the older version, keep the matching set of system-config-display and system-display-gui.
It sounds like you have a bunch of multiple installed versons of the rpm packages, so create a list and remove all the older versions using the list as your guide.

rpm -qa --qf="%{n}-%{v}-%{r}.%{arch}.rpm\n" | sort > Installed.txt

Any text editor can be used to review this generated list. Yes this will take some time to remove all the multiple copies but it needs to be done. Be careful when doing this having the x86 and x86_64 rpm packages installed is OK as long as the version levels match, a brief example that is OK;

$ rpm -qa --qf="%{n}-%{v}-%{r}.%{arch}.rpm\n" 'arts*' 'alsa*' | sort
alsa-lib-1.0.12-2.i386.rpm
alsa-lib-1.0.12-2.x86_64.rpm
alsa-lib-devel-1.0.12-2.x86_64.rpm
alsa-utils-1.0.12-1.x86_64.rpm
arts-1.5.4-1.i386.rpm
arts-1.5.4-1.x86_64.rpm
arts-devel-1.5.4-1.x86_64.rpm

You need not worry about the mixed mode environment unless you are having problems. The only time you need to be concerned is when you are then you just make sure the version levels match. I believe that this may be part of the problem, removing the older extra copies of the installed rpm packages should take care of this.

satimis · 08-28-2006, 09:52 AM

Hi Lenard,

- deleted -

Quote:

rpm -qa --qf="%{n}-%{v}-%{r}.%{arch}.rpm\n" | sort > Installed.txt

Any text editor can be used to review this generated list. Yes this will take some time to remove all the multiple copies but it needs to be done.

Installed.txt is a 23 pages files. There are many old packages which need to be deleted.

I wonder whether reinstalling FC5_64 would be easier and time-saving. All working/important data have been burned on DVD.

What I'm insterested/curious to know is how this FC5_64 getting to this state. Would its reinstallation come back to the same problem?

Tks

B.R.
satimis

satimis · 08-28-2006, 09:57 AM

Hi folks,

Have you tried "fc6-test2-dvd-x86_64". Any comment? I'm prepared to test it instead of reinstalling FC5_64. Advice would be appreciated. TIA

B.R.
satimis

Lenard · 08-28-2006, 03:52 PM

Yes it would be quicker to re-install since you have the backup.

Yes I know about FC6-test2 and have no comment about it. I have some parts already incorporated into CentOS but I'm not in a position to comment on the test release. As far as I'm concerned the Fedora Core series is test platform with serious gaps/leaps in support. I'm not slaming the Fedora Core series, I just perfer a more stable and tested working environment, the release often/release early apporach is not 'my cup of tea'.