Salut les amis,
Je rencontre depuis hier (après mise a jour) que j'ai un soucis pour l'installation de certains packets comme l'exemple ci dessous :
Merci d'avance pour votre aide
Je rencontre depuis hier (après mise a jour) que j'ai un soucis pour l'installation de certains packets comme l'exemple ci dessous :
[c00ler@latop ~]$ su -c "dnf install SDL2_image"
Password:
Last metadata expiration check performed 0:46:19 ago on Fri Nov 20 15:16:41 2015.
Dependencies resolved.
================================================================================
Package Arch Version Repository Size
================================================================================
Installing:
SDL2_image x86_64 2.0.0-8.fc23 fedora 56 k
Transaction Summary
================================================================================
Install 1 Package
Total download size: 56 k
Installed size: 104 k
Is this ok [y/N]: y
Downloading Packages:
SDL2_image-2.0.0-8.fc23.x86_64.rpm 42 kB/s | 56 kB 00:01
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 19 kB/s | 56 kB 00:02
Running transaction check
Transaction check succeeded.
Running transaction test
Transaction test succeeded.
Running transaction
Installing : SDL2_image-2.0.0-8.fc23.x86_64 1/1
Verifying : SDL2_image-2.0.0-8.fc23.x86_64 1/1
Installed:
SDL2_image.x86_64 2.0.0-8.fc23
Complete!
[c00ler@latop ~]$ su -c "dnf install SDL2_image-devel"
Password:
Last metadata expiration check performed 0:46:41 ago on Fri Nov 20 15:16:41 2015.
Error: nothing provides pkgconfig(xproto) needed by libXrender-devel-0.9.9-2.fc23.i686
(try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting packages)
[c00ler@latop ~]$
Tout ce passe bien pour le package principal mais les -devel ne passes plus, pourtant j'ai vérifier :[c00ler@latop ~]$ su -c "dnf provides pkgconfig"
Password:
Last metadata expiration check performed 0:50:11 ago on Fri Nov 20 15:16:41 2015.
pkgconfig-1:0.28-9.fc23.x86_64 : A tool for determining compilation options
Repo : @System
pkgconfig-1:0.28-9.fc23.i686 : A tool for determining compilation options
Repo : fedora
pkgconfig-1:0.28-9.fc23.x86_64 : A tool for determining compilation options
Repo : fedora
[c00ler@latop ~]$
et ça donne ça :[c00ler@latop ~]$ su -c "dnf install pkgconfig"
Password:
Last metadata expiration check performed 0:50:56 ago on Fri Nov 20 15:16:41 2015.
Package pkgconfig-1:0.28-9.fc23.x86_64 is already installed, skipping.
Dependencies resolved.
Nothing to do.
Complete!
[c00ler@latop ~]$
et un autre soucis :[c00ler@latop ~]$ su -c "dnf update"
Password:
Last metadata expiration check performed 0:51:45 ago on Fri Nov 20 15:16:41 2015.
Dependencies resolved.
================================================================================
Package Arch Version Repository Size
================================================================================
Upgrading:
openssl x86_64 1:1.0.2d-3.fc23 updates 511 k
Transaction Summary
================================================================================
Upgrade 1 Package
Total download size: 511 k
Is this ok [y/N]: y
Downloading Packages:
openssl-1.0.2d-3.fc23.x86_64.rpm 93 kB/s | 511 kB 00:05
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 66 kB/s | 511 kB 00:07
Running transaction check
Transaction check succeeded.
Running transaction test
Transaction test succeeded.
Running transaction
Upgrading : openssl-1:1.0.2d-3.fc23.x86_64 1/2
Error unpacking rpm package openssl-1:1.0.2d-3.fc23.x86_64
Error unpacking rpm package openssl-1:1.0.2d-3.fc23.x86_64
error: unpacking of archive failed on file /etc/pki/CA/newcerts: cpio: (error 0x2)
openssl-1:1.0.2d-3.fc23.x86_64 was supposed to be installed but is not!
Verifying : openssl-1:1.0.2d-3.fc23.x86_64 1/2
openssl-1:1.0.2d-2.fc23.x86_64 was supposed to be removed but is not!
Verifying : openssl-1:1.0.2d-2.fc23.x86_64 2/2
Failed:
openssl.x86_64 1:1.0.2d-3.fc23
Complete!
[c00ler@latop ~]$
Bon y a eu une MAJ du kernel :[c00ler@latop ~]$ uname -a
Linux latop 4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Oct 27 04:29:56 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
La seule chose que je n'est pas fais c'est un redémarrage après MAJ j’espère que c'est pas ça ???Merci d'avance pour votre aide