SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

June 2008

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jan Iven <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Sun, 15 Jun 2008 13:37:03 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (33 lines)
On 06/13/2008 12:25 PM, Faye Gibbins wrote:
> We've got a problem on our 64bit SL5.0 machines.
[..]
> Transaction Check Error:
>   file /usr/share/man/man1/c2ph.1.gz from install of 
> perl-5.8.8-10.el5_2.3 conflicts with file from package 
> perl-5.8.8-10.el5_2.3


This appears to be another instance of problem coming from rebuilding 
i386 and x86_64 packages on different dates - these man pages contain 
the build date:

--- c2ph.1.i386	2008-06-15 13:31:46.000000000 +0200
+++ c2ph.1.x86_64	2008-06-15 13:31:18.000000000 +0200
@@ -129,1 +129,1 @@
-.TH C2PH 1 "2008-06-11" "perl v5.8.8" "Perl Programmers Reference Guide"
+.TH C2PH 1 "2008-06-12" "perl v5.8.8" "Perl Programmers Reference Guide"

RPM's multilib handling tells it to ignore files that would conflict 
between i386 and x86_64 RPMs, but which are in fact identical - such as 
man pages. However, if these differ, RPM will complain and fall over.

We have occasionally seen instances of this issue in the past with SL4 
as well. No idea how T.U.V. manages to avoid these.

Only solution I know of is to rebuild both RPMs (on the same day). And 
gently file upstream bugs, putting the compile date into a man page is 
really icky...

Regards
Jan

ATOM RSS1 RSS2