>
> Problem: package from @commandline requires postgis33_15, but none of
> the providers can be installed
> - package postgis33_15-3.3.1-1.rhel8.x86_64 from pgdg15 requires
> gdal35-libs >= 3.5.2, but none of the providers can be installed
> - package postgis33_15-3.3.1-1.rhel8.x86_64 fro
What's that ?
On 13 January 2024 20:26:19 CET, Joseph G wrote:
>>
>> Problem: package from @commandline requires postgis33_15, but none of
>> the providers can be installed
>> - package postgis33_15-3.3.1-1.rhel8.x86_64 from pgdg15 requires
>> gdal35-libs >= 3.5.2, but none of the prov
the is the RPM that I'm trying to install, here is the output for the
requirements:
sudo rpm -qp takserver-*.noarch.rpm --requires
> warning: takserver-5.0-RELEASE31.noarch.rpm: Header V4 RSA/SHA512
> Signature, key ID 6851f5b5: NOKEY
> rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) <= 3.0.3-1
> rpmlib(Compr
>
> sudo rpm -qp
> https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/8/Everything/x86_64/Packages/a/armadillo-12.6.6-1.el8.x86_64.rpm
> --provides
> armadillo = 12.6.6-1.el8
> armadillo(x86-64) = 12.6.6-1.el8
> libarmadillo.so.12()(64bit)
sudo rpm -qp
> https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/7/x86_64/Packages
Hi,
On Sat, 2024-01-13 at 13:23 -0800, Joseph G wrote:
> If we look, gdal35 or 36 is asking for libarmadillo.so.10 which
> doesn't look like its available for EL8 just an older EL7? I can't
> get past this error at the moment.
Pushed GDAL 3.6.4-6 RPMS to the repos built against armadillo 12 for
I can confirm everything works now, Thank you!
Sent via mobile, please excuse typos and brevity.
On Mon, Jan 15, 2024, 02:20 Devrim Gündüz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 2024-01-13 at 13:23 -0800, Joseph G wrote:
> > If we look, gdal35 or 36 is asking for libarmadillo.so.10 which
> > doesn't look lik
A little while ago this month, this was reported:
https://www.spinics.net/lists/pgsql/msg219648.html
The issue was fixed for GDAL 3.6, but the same problem still exists for
GDAL 3.7, which also needs to be rebuilt against armadillo 12 for rhel 8
(and possibly 9 as well?) This is what I get current
For this issue, I suggest you contact the packager, rather than the
software development community.
---
On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 04:55:27PM -0800, James Colannino wrote:
> A little while ago this month, this was reported:
>
