On Thu, 2012-04-05 at 23:34 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
John Reiser wrote:
> Or, some packager forgot to use %{?_isa} when specifying package
> dependencies which are [or become] architecture-dependent. This is a
> common and systematic error which causes much grief. None of the tools
> check for it, which is another bug^W"opportunity for enhancement".
%{?_isa} wouldn't really fix this. It'd just change the error from
"protected multilib versions" to "unresolvable dependencies". The
real issue
is that the repository contains packages with broken dependencies, and
there's no magic bullet to fix that in yum or in the packaging. There is,
however, talk about enforcing the AutoQA dependency checks on the Bodhi end,
which should fix that problem in most cases.
AFAICS the real problem here is that an update got unpushed. It seems
like Richard got the 64-bit version of libvirt -3 installed, then the -3
update got unpushed, then something wanted to install the 32-bit version
of libvirt. Obviously, since the update had been unpushed, it was
impossible to find the matching 32-bit version.
As long as updates can be unpushed, that one can pop up.
The other classic case where we get a lot of this (and similar errors)
is when we push the fedora-release update which disables
updates-testing; people have the 64-bit version of something installed
from updates-testing, then they need to have the 32-bit version
installed, but now updates-testing is disabled...
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net