Thank you for that clarification.  ATrpms was "required" to get support 
for one of the other packages installed and/or applications we needed to 
build (I forget which).

Prior to your response, I located the offending RPM and performed a 
command line

rpm -e live-2012.02.04-1.el6.x86_64

No other dependencies were displayed upon execution of the above command 
(if memory serves, the -e flag will then respond packages A, B, ... need 
also to be removed and queries before proceeding if rpm finds such 
dependencies), and thus it completed.

vlc 2.0.6 production then did install from RPMfusion, and now does work.

Presumably, if I downloaded the development versions of all of the 
packages that vlc 2.0.6 rpm used, I could build vlc 2.0.7 .  At the 
moment, this is not necessary.

(Etiquette:  does this list want start or end replies?  I have forgotten.)

Yasha Karant

On 07/16/2013 12:01 PM, John Pilkington wrote:
> On 16/07/13 19:07, Yasha Karant wrote:
>> We need to support a variety of applications on our 3D scientific
>> visualisation client workstations, running SL6x x86-64 using the
>> proprietary Nvidia 3D Xwindows drivers (and Nvidia CUDA5 along with
>> OpenCL).
>>
>> When I installed rpmfusion for vlc production current (2.0.6) for IA-32
>> on my laptop, there were no issues.  When I attempt to install the same
>> thing here, I find:
>>
>> Test Transaction Errors:   file /usr/lib64/libBasicUsageEnvironment.so.0
>> from install of live555-0-0.37.2012.04.27.el6.x86_64 conflicts with file
>> from package live-2012.02.04-1.el6.x86_64
>>    file /usr/lib64/libUsageEnvironment.so.0 from install of
>> live555-0-0.37.2012.04.27.el6.x86_64 conflicts with file from package
>> live-2012.02.04-1.el6.x86_64
>>    file /usr/lib64/libgroupsock.so.0 from install of
>> live555-0-0.37.2012.04.27.el6.x86_64 conflicts with file from package
>> live-2012.02.04-1.el6.x86_64
>>    file /usr/lib64/libliveMedia.so.0 from install of
>> live555-0-0.37.2012.04.27.el6.x86_64 conflicts with file from package
>> live-2012.02.04-1.el6.x86_64
>>
>> end messages from Add/Remove Software GUI.
>>
>> I have found:
>>
>> http://www.live555.com/liveMedia/
>
> 'live' comes from the ATrpms repo for el6, and rpmfusion/ATrpms are
> known to conflict.  What happens if you try to yum remove it?  Why do
> you have it installed?
>
> http://dl.atrpms.net/el6-x86_64/atrpms/stable/live-2012.02.04-1.el6.x86_64.rpm
>
>
> John
>
>
>>
>> but nothing for live-2012 (nor my guess of live2012) that seems relevant
>> to this issue.
>>
>> I am not asking for specifics on debugging -- however, I do not
>> recognize either live555 nor live-2012 except from the above search
>> yields -- indicating that live555 provides a "set of C++ libraries for
>> multimedia streaming, using open standard protocols (RTP/RTCP, RTSP,
>> SIP)" -- that makes sense for an application such as vlc.  Does anyone
>> know anything about these "packages"?  Will one suffice for the other
>> and thus a manual install with a force nodeps override will in fact work?
>>
>> Technical question:  for a .so file or an executable, ldd will inform as
>> to the required dependencies.  What is the functional equivalent for a
>> rpm file to ldd, preferably an equivalent that will list both the
>> dependencies in terms of actual files (e.g., foobar.so.3.7.19-mnj) and
>> (hopefully) the RPMs from a particular repository (e.g., SL, rpmfusion,
>> etc., depending upon the distribution that supplied the RPM) that supply
>> such files?
>>
>> Otherwise, I am back to the issue of finding the "non-free" and other
>> CODECs needed for vlc current production release built from source (not
>> SRPM, but source).
>>
>> Any information would be appreciated.
>>
>> Yasha Karant
>>