Fabian Arrotin wrote: > On Fri, 2007-07-20 at 16:22 -0700, John Thomas wrote: >> A recent update to postfix mysql errors on my cOS 4.5 system with >> complaints about missing dependencies libmysqlclient.so.15 and >> libpq.so.4. Have I messed up again? >> >> Details: >> CentOS45[root at mail ~]# yum update >> Setting up Update Process >> Setting up repositories >> Reading repository metadata in from local files >> Reducing CentOS.Karan.Org-EL4 - Stable to included packages only >> Finished >> Excluding Packages from CentOS-4 - Base >> Finished >> Reducing CentOS-4 - Plus to included packages only >> Finished >> Resolving Dependencies >> --> Populating transaction set with selected packages. Please wait. >> ---> Package postfix.i386 2:2.2.10-1.1.el4.centos.mysql_pgsql set to be >> updated >> --> Running transaction check >> --> Processing Dependency: libmysqlclient.so.15 for package: postfix >> --> Processing Dependency: libmysqlclient.so.15(libmysqlclient_15) for >> package: postfix >> --> Processing Dependency: libpq.so.4 for package: postfix >> --> Finished Dependency Resolution >> Error: Missing Dependency: libmysqlclient.so.15 is needed by package postfix >> Error: Missing Dependency: libmysqlclient.so.15(libmysqlclient_15) is >> needed by package postfix >> Error: Missing Dependency: libpq.so.4 is needed by package postfix >> CentOS45[root at mail ~]# > > Both dependencies are resolved (as answered by yum provides > --enablerepo=centosplus ...) by postgresql-libs (for libpq.so.4) and > mysql (for libmysqlclient.so.15) ... but it seems you've excluded some > packages from your centosplus repo config file .... > Be aware that the newer postfix package needs mysql5 .... consider this > prior to upgrade ! I have to decide what to build that package against ... it was built against the PLUS repo (as most users who enable the Plus repo enable it all). You can easily build it against the base repo and use it ... or I can provide RPMS that are built against the base repo too. If I make these new rpms ... one will be called <name>.base .... the other <name>.plus. You would have to "exclude=" the <name>.plus one to get the <name>.base one. Would that be better? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 252 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20070721/8082aae2/attachment-0005.sig>