On 16.07.21 12:39, Simon Matter wrote: >> On 16/07/21 10:19 pm, Simon Matter wrote: >>>> I think you missed from a different post where the package was created >>>> by a different 3rd-party, not google. So how else would you expect the >>>> 3rd-party package to satisfy the dependency? >>> >>> I didn't say the chrome packages came from google. But, the TO has some >>> chrome RPM installed which "provides" the libstdc++ version required by >>> teams, but doesn't really provide this libstdc++ version to the whole >>> system. That's why the RPM is broken, it claims to provide a libstdc++ >>> version which it doesn't really provide. >> >> And I ask again, how else would you expect the package to satisfy the >> dependency in chrome for the newer libstdc++? The package was >> explicitly created to allow chrome to run on an older system that >> doesn't have the newer libstdc++, by rights it should work with other >> programs that need a newer libstdc++ as well provided that they set >> LD_LIBRARY_PATH appropriately. So it does, in fact, provide the stated >> dependency for the entire system, you just have to tell programs that >> need it where to find it. > > And that's where it breaks the rules! It "provides" something that it > doesn't really provide. That's NOT allowed with RPM because it breaks > other applications. It breaks the whole meaning of dependency tracking of > the RPM system. That's why the mentioned chrome package has to be > considered broken. > $ LANG=C rpm -qp --provides https://dl.google.com/linux/direct/google-chrome-stable_current_x86_64.rpm warning: https://dl.google.com/linux/direct/google-chrome-stable_current_x86_64.rpm: Header V4 DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID 7fac5991: NOKEY google-chrome = 91.0.4472.164 google-chrome-stable = 91.0.4472.164-1 google-chrome-stable(x86-64) = 91.0.4472.164-1 $ -- Leon