On Tue, 2004-12-14 at 20:13 -0600, Derek P. Moore wrote:
ok i tried in upgrading gdbm -> same problems So i downgrade to gtk2-2.2 / inkscape 0.38 (rpm -Uvh --force --nodeps) and everything return to normal.
You're overwriting GTK+ 2.2 with GTK+ 2.4, this most likely your problem.
No, it really shouldn't be. Modulo a bug that was in a few GTK+-2.4 versions (and is fixed now), anything built against an older GTK+-2.x version should be able to use a more recent GTK+ version at runtime.
If nothing else, you can try doing 'rpm -ivh gtk2-2.4*' instead of -Uvh. This way you'll have both packages installed at the same time. The package installed last will likely overwrite any binaries and documentation, etc. But the shared libraries should be named in such a way as to not overwrite each other.
No. They are not parallel-installable since the ABI has been expanded but not broken. I believe that the new package will completely and utterly clobber the old one.
On my FC3 systems, for example, I have gtkmm2 and gtkmm24 installed. But in cases where packages aren't so conviently named, sometimes your only option is to use -ivh instead of -Uvh. (I've had to do this with curl several times.)
And this is rather unrelated to what's going on with the core GTK packages. The C++ language bindings, gtkmm and friends, broke ABI between 2.2 and 2.4 and were thus made parallel installable, that's why people typically make packages such as gtkmm20-2.2.x and gtkmm24-2.4.x etc. Even the gtkmm20 packages run against newer versions of GTK+ though. The GTK+ developers are committed to binary compatibility until GTK+ 3 is released. (And at that point, GTK+ 2 and 3 packages will be parallel installable.) [By the way, the API/ABI change between gtkmm 2.2 and 2.4 is completely unrelated to the underlying C++ API change between GCC 3.3 and 3.4, and the corresponding changed libstdc++.]
Unfortunately I'm afraid that something significantly more sinister is going on, but I can't see what.
Herve: you really only upgraded the GTK+ and glib packages? And by the way, I presume that it was GDM, not gdbm, you installed on Robert's suggestion? gdbm wouldn't be related to this, but GDM could be.
Alternatively, you might have better luck rebuilding the FC2 SRPMs on FC1 and installing the resulting binaries.
Good luck, Per