Broken deps - RPM Fusion free Fedora development - 2008-12-15

[Julian Sikorski]

Michael Schwendt pisze:
> On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 21:57:47 +0100, Julian wrote:
> 
>> Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski pisze:
>>> On Monday, 15 December 2008 at 21:21, Julian Sikorski wrote:
>>>> Michael Schwendt pisze:
>>> [...]
>>>>> ======================================================================
>>>>> Broken packages in rpmfusion-free-development-x86_64:
>>>>>
>>>>>     ffmpeg-libs-0.4.9-0.52.20080908.fc10.i386  requires  libfaac.so.0
>>>>>     gstreamer-plugins-bad-0.10.9-1.fc10.i386  requires  libfaac.so.0
>>>>>     libquicktime-1.0.3-4.fc10.i386  requires  libfaac.so.0
>>>>>     mencoder-1.0-0.103.20080903svn.fc10.i386  requires  libfaac.so.0
>>> [...]
>>>> I am somewhat responsible for faac, I suggested to update it but did not
>>>> notice the abi bump. Sorry. Please let me know if I can help to bring
>>>> this back to shape.
>>> Well, you could check if there haven't been any API changes, IOW if the
>>> affected packages build against the new faac. I would prefer it if this
>>> build were removed because we're in the middle of rebuilding most of our
>>> multimedia stack against the new x264 and ffmpeg and I don't want any
>>> unnecessary release bumps and rebuilds.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> R.
>>>
>> Hmm, I just installed the faac-1.26 on my Fedora 10, and it seems the
>> soname is the same:
>> $ rpm -q --provides faac
>> libfaac.so.0()(64bit)
>> faac = 1.26-1.fc11
>> faac(x86-64) = 1.26-1.fc11
>> $ readelf -a /usr/lib64/libfaac.so.0.0.0 |grep SONAME
>>  0x000000000000000e (SONAME)             Library soname: [libfaac.so.0]
> 
> And what are you trying to prove?
> 
>  * Notice the repository id.
>  * Notice the package %arch.
>  * Draw your conclusion.
>  * Confirm by listing the repo directory.
> 
Got it, faac did not get picked to be multilib :)

Julian