On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 17:11:44 +0200 Manfred Hollstein <manfre...@gmx.net> wrote:
>Moin, > >On Tue, 25 Jun 2019, 16:56:48 +0200, pack...@howorth.org.uk wrote: >> On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 15:35:27 +0200 >> Manfred Hollstein <manfre...@gmx.net> wrote: >> >> >Moin, >> > >> >On Tue, 25 Jun 2019, 15:17:34 +0200, pack...@howorth.org.uk wrote: >> >> I just looked and noticed that I have three versions of all >> >> (AFAICT) of the libav* packages. e.g: >> >> >> >> libavformat56 >> >> libavformat57 >> >> libavformat58 >> >> >> >> Most of them have numbers 56,57,58 in the name. Some have 2,3,4 or >> >> 5,6,7 >> >> >> >> Do I need or benefit in some way from having all three? Or should >> >> I just have the latest version (4.0.2.lp150...)? >> >> >> >> If this is all documented somewhere, I apologize for not finding >> >> it. >> > >> >you can figure out this yourself: >> > >> > rpm -e --test $(locate libavformat56) >> > rpm -e --test $(locate libavformat57) >> > rpm -e --test $(locate libavformat58) >> > >> >Every command will moan about a package still requiring the >> >libavformat to be removed. Only if no other package requires it, >> >i.e. the output from the related command is empty, you can remove >> >the package (i.e. remove the "--test" from the command line). >> >> Thanks. All three versions produce output similar to >> >> # rpm -e --test $(locate libavformat56) >> error: package /usr/share/licenses/libavformat56 is not installed >> error: package /usr/share/licenses/libavformat56/COPYING.GPLv2 is >> not installed error: >> package /usr/share/licenses/libavformat56/LICENSE.md is not installed >> >> I'm not sure what that means (never used locate before and don't know >> much about rpm. > >OK, probably my fault. Just try running the commands _without_ the >locate thing: > > rpm -e --test libavformat56 > rpm -e --test libavformat57 > rpm -e --test libavformat58 Those all have dependencies on various other packages in the libav family. libavdevice?? seems more fundamental but gives me a surprising result: # rpm -e --test libavdevice56 # rpm -e --test libavdevice57 error: Failed dependencies: libavdevice.so.57()(64bit) is needed by (installed) libmpv1-0.27.2-lp150.4.2.x86_64 libavdevice.so.57()(64bit) is needed by (installed) mpv-0.27.2-lp150.4.2.x86_64 libavdevice.so.57()(64bit) is needed by (installed) libav-tools-12.3-lp150.1.1.x86_64 libavdevice.so.57()(64bit) is needed by (installed) libmlt6-modules-6.10.0-lp150.11.2.x86_64 libavdevice.so.57()(64bit) is needed by (installed) ffmpeg-3-3.4.4-lp150.9.4.x86_64 libavdevice.so.57(LIBAVDEVICE_57)(64bit) is needed by (installed) libmpv1-0.27.2-lp150.4.2.x86_64 libavdevice.so.57(LIBAVDEVICE_57)(64bit) is needed by (installed) mpv-0.27.2-lp150.4.2.x86_64 libavdevice.so.57(LIBAVDEVICE_57)(64bit) is needed by (installed) libav-tools-12.3-lp150.1.1.x86_64 libavdevice.so.57(LIBAVDEVICE_57)(64bit) is needed by (installed) libmlt6-modules-6.10.0-lp150.11.2.x86_64 libavdevice.so.57(LIBAVDEVICE_57)(64bit) is needed by (installed) ffmpeg-3-3.4.4-lp150.9.4.x86_64 libavdevice57 = 3.4.4-lp150.9.4 is needed by (installed) ffmpeg-3-3.4.4-lp150.9.4.x86_64 # rpm -e --test libavdevice58 # As far as I can see, libavformat56 and friends are not used by anything. 57 is used by a lot of stuff and 58 is also used by some things, but for some reason they don't use libavdevice58. Does that sound plausible? So I can delete the *56 packages in the correct order. Thanks again, Dave >Cheers. > >l8er >manfred _______________________________________________ Packman mailing list Packman@links2linux.de http://lists.links2linux.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/packman