Problem 1: cannot install the best update candidate for package matio-devel-1.5.23-3.fc38.x86_64
- nothing provides pkgconfig(hdf5) >= 1.8 needed by matio-devel-1.5.24-1.fc38.x86_64 from updates-testing
Problem 2: problem with installed package matio-devel-1.5.23-3.fc38.x86_64
- package matio-devel-1.5.23-3.fc38.x86_64 from fedora requires matio = 1.5.23-3.fc38, but none of the providers can be installed
- package matio-devel-1.5.23-3.fc38.x86_64 from @System requires matio = 1.5.23-3.fc38, but none of the providers can be installed
- matio-1.5.23-3.fc38.i686 from fedora does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- cannot install both matio-1.5.24-1.fc38.x86_64 from updates-testing and matio-1.5.23-3.fc38.x86_64 from @System
- cannot install both matio-1.5.24-1.fc38.x86_64 from updates-testing and matio-1.5.23-3.fc38.x86_64 from fedora
- cannot install the best update candidate for package matio-1.5.23-3.fc38.x86_64
- nothing provides pkgconfig(hdf5) >= 1.8 needed by matio-devel-1.5.24-1.fc38.x86_64 from updates-testing
Patching that our doesn't remove the pkgconfig(hdf5) Requires...I guess I'm wondering, if rpm is automatically generating this requirement, shouldn't it also be generating the equivalent Provides on the hdf5 subpackage?
This update has been submitted for testing by limb.
This update's test gating status has been changed to 'ignored'.
This update has been pushed to testing.
update fails on an up-to-date F-38 because nothing provides pkgconfig(hdf5) >= 1.8 needed by matio-devel-1.5.24-1.fc38.ppc64le from updates-testing
Bodhi is disabling automatic push to stable due to negative karma. The maintainer may push manually if they determine that the issue is not severe.
Got this error during upgrade
Odd, the matio spec doesn't explicitly specify pkgconfig(hdf5), simply hdf5-devel.
Isn't it automagically generated? I see
/usr/lib64/pkgconfig/matio.pccontainsRequires.private: hdf5 >= 1.8 zlib >= 1.2.3which is wrong for a shared lib, I believePatching that our doesn't remove the pkgconfig(hdf5) Requires...I guess I'm wondering, if rpm is automatically generating this requirement, shouldn't it also be generating the equivalent Provides on the hdf5 subpackage?
This update has been obsoleted by matio-1.5.24-2.fc38.