Try rpm -Fvh foo
The F switch forces the installation, I believe.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Ruggiero [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 2:03 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Chicken-and-egg problem with glibc and rpm
>
> Today's fun and games:
>
> Okay, so I want to upgrade to the newest version of "patch", which I
> apparently need for some of the latest-and-greatest kernel patches. (This
> is for my firewall machine - generic RH6.2 with a fairly-current 2.2.17
> kernel from rawhide rpms, necessary because I need IPSEC support) So I
> snarf the "patch" package's .rpm and try an install:
>
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 60007 Nov 26 12:23
> patch-2.5.4-8.i386.rpm
> [/tmp]# rpm -ivh patch*
> error: failed dependencies:
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2) is needed by patch-2.5.4-8
>
> No problem, I need a new glibc. I get it and try and install it first:
>
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13100397 Nov 26 12:59
> glibc-2.1.97-2.i386.rpm
> [/tmp]# rpm -ivh glibc*
> error: failed dependencies:
> rpm <= 4.0-0.65 conflicts with glibc-2.1.97-2
>
> Ooops, it conflicts with my current version of rpm. Okay, so let's upgrade
> rpm first instead:
>
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1232892 Nov 26 13:41
> rpm-4.0-4.4.i386.rpm
> [/tmp]# rpm -ivh rpm*
> error: failed dependencies:
> glibc >= 2.1.92 is needed by rpm-4.0-4.4
> db1 = 1.85 is needed by rpm-4.0-4.4
> libbz2.so.1 is needed by rpm-4.0-4.4
> libdb-3.1.so is needed by rpm-4.0-4.4
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2) is needed by rpm-4.0-4.4
>
>
> SO...long story short, I can't install glibc because it will break rpm,
> BUT if I install the new RPM first, it will fail because I've still got
> the old glibc, and I'll have no way to install the new one, because I need
> a working "rpm" to do that....<sigh>
>
> What do people do in chicken-and-egg situations like this? I'm all ears
> for a solution (a pointer to an appropriate net.resource is fine, too).
>
> thanks,
> David
>
> PS: I know that RPM is pretty good at figuring out dependencies, etc, if
> you give it all packages to be upgraded at once shot (ie, "rpm -ivh
> *.rpm). But I figure that may not apply here, where one of the packages to
> be installed *IS* rpm itself.
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
