Well, I'm afraid that the overnight update runs of SL 3.0.3 i386 
here have reported as follows:

 --------------------
 YUM - Daily Update
 --------------------
/usr/bin/update-gdk-pixbuf-loaders: line 27:
/etc/gtk-2.0/i386-redhat-linux-gnu/gdk-pixbuf.loaders: No such file or
directory
error: %post(librsvg2-2.2.3-6) scriptlet failed, exit status 1
Updated:  tetex 1.0.7-67.7.i386 librsvg2 2.2.3-6.i386 tetex-afm
1.0.7-67.7.i386 gtk2 2.2.4-15.i386 tetex-fonts 1.0.7-67.7.i386

- and the affected machines now have two versions of the RPM 
installed:

$ rpm -qa librsvg2
librsvg2-2.2.3-2
librsvg2-2.2.3-6

So it seems there's still *some* kind of oddity in there, and 
somewhat similar to the problems already reported from 3.0.4.  

Please excuse me for shooting this off before trying any kind of 
investigation of the underlying details, but I thought it best to at
least have a place-holder on record in case there are other folks 
affected by this in 3.0.3 (as I surmise there will be?).


On Sat, 2 Apr 2005, Troy Dawson wrote:

> Yup,
> It looks like RedHat snuck a new dependancy in on us.  Basically they are
> making you have a package that was bugfix/update and not a security errata.  I
> wish they wouldn't do that, but it sure looks like it's going to keep
> happening.  I'm setting up a way to check for these.  Hopefully we can keep
> this re-occurance down.
> I think I've got this fixed for the i386, and x86_64, and we're working on the
> ia64.
> Troy