Bug 183

Summary: Dependencies of old kernel
Product: Fedora Reporter: Roberto Niunes <robbie.nunes>
Component: gspcaAssignee: Jonathan Dieter <jdieter>
Status: RESOLVED FIXED    
Severity: normal CC: fedora
Priority: P5    
Version: 9   
Hardware: All   
OS: GNU/Linux   
namespace:

Description Roberto Niunes 2008-11-22 20:17:33 CET 
# yum install gspca
Loaded plugins: refresh-packagekit
Setting up Install Process
Parsing package install arguments
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
---> Package gspca.noarch 0:1.00.20-2.fc9 set to be updated
--> Processing Dependency: gspca-kmod >= 1.00.20 for package: gspca
--> Running transaction check
---> Package kmod-gspca.i686 0:1.00.20-30.fc9.2 set to be updated
--> Processing Dependency: kmod-gspca-2.6.26.6-79.fc9.i686 = 1.00.20-30.fc9.2 for package: kmod-gspca
--> Running transaction check
---> Package kmod-gspca-2.6.26.6-79.fc9.i686.i686 0:1.00.20-30.fc9.2 set to be updated
--> Processing Dependency: kernel-uname-r = 2.6.26.6-79.fc9.i686 for package: kmod-gspca-2.6.26.6-79.fc9.i686
--> Finished Dependency Resolution
kmod-gspca-2.6.26.6-79.fc9.i686-1.00.20-30.fc9.2.i686 from rpmfusion-free-updates has depsolving problems
  --> Missing Dependency: kernel-uname-r = 2.6.26.6-79.fc9.i686 is needed by package kmod-gspca-2.6.26.6-79.fc9.i686-1.00.20-30.fc9.2.i686 (rpmfusion-free-updates)
Error: Missing Dependency: kernel-uname-r = 2.6.26.6-79.fc9.i686 is needed by package kmod-gspca-2.6.26.6-79.fc9.i686-1.00.20-30.fc9.2.i686 (rpmfusion-free-updates)
Comment 1 Thorsten Leemhuis 2008-11-22 20:42:20 CET 
this kind of is "not a bug", because the latest F9 kernel contains gspca already these days. Hence you should just not try to install it.

Which brings me to the real solution: Jonathan, should we just remove gspca completely from the repo?
Comment 2 Jonathan Dieter 2008-11-22 21:22:02 CET 
(In reply to comment #1)
> this kind of is "not a bug", because the latest F9 kernel contains gspca
> already these days. Hence you should just not try to install it.
> 
> Which brings me to the real solution: Jonathan, should we just remove gspca
> completely from the repo?

It sounds good to me, at least for F9.  We should probably leave it in F8, at least until 2.6.27 comes out there.  I don't suppose there's any chance the kernel guys would obsolete it...wishful thinking, I'm sure.

I don't think I have enough access to remove it, so if you want to take care of that, Thorsten, I'd appreciate it.
Comment 3 Thorsten Leemhuis 2008-11-22 21:34:35 CET 
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > Which brings me to the real solution: Jonathan, should we just remove gspca
> > completely from the repo?
> It sounds good to me, at least for F9. 

Removal in the works.

> We should probably leave it in F8, at least until 2.6.27 comes out there.

Sure

> I don't suppose there's any chance the
> kernel guys would obsolete it...wishful thinking, I'm sure.

No need to -- it will get removed together with the old kernels sooner or later