Bug 167049

Summary:	Cannot install package with unresolved dependencies
Product:	[openSUSE] SUSE Linux 10.1	Reporter:	Juergen Mell <juergen.mell>
Component:	YaST2	Assignee:	Ladislav Slezák <lslezak>
Status:	RESOLVED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov>
Severity:	Minor
Priority:	P5 - None	CC:	dmacvicar, suse-beta
Version:	RC 1
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	i686
OS:	Other
Whiteboard:
Found By:	Other	Services Priority:
Business Priority:		Blocker:	---
Marketing QA Status:	---	IT Deployment:	---
Attachments:	Screenshot with error message YaST2 log files (older files) YaST2 log files (today's files)

Description Juergen Mell 2006-04-17 15:04:36 UTC

I try to replace the standard kaffeine-0.7.1-23 with the new version 0.8.1-0.pm0 from packman. When I press 'Übernehmen' I get an error message window telling me that libgstreamer-0.8.so.1 is not available. I tell YaST to ignore that conflict. Then I get the error message window from screenshot4.png, which is IMHO wrong (the paket is on the source media and it does not fail the integrity check but it depends on another paket which is not installed). Pressing any of the buttons 'Abbrechen', 'Wiederholen' or 'Ignorieren' will close the error message window and the paket installation window. Even if other pakets were installed before or if other pakets are due for installation they are not installed and SuSEconfig is not run.

Comment 1 Juergen Mell 2006-04-17 15:05:44 UTC

Created attachment 78658 [details]
Screenshot with error message

Comment 2 Juergen Mell 2006-04-17 15:18:30 UTC

Created attachment 78662 [details]
YaST2 log files (older files)

Comment 3 Juergen Mell 2006-04-17 15:25:43 UTC

Created attachment 78666 [details]
YaST2 log files (today's files)

Comment 4 Jiri Srain 2006-07-26 12:11:14 UTC

Duncan, is it possible to allow to install the package even if the signature check fails? What should the callback return?

Comment 5 Duncan Mac-Vicar 2006-08-18 10:12:53 UTC

Are we talking about signature check of the metadata or checksum of the package?

Comment 6 Jiri Srain 2006-08-21 13:46:18 UTC

Yes, the problem is that signature check fails.

Comment 7 Ladislav Slezák 2007-02-14 08:00:19 UTC

It seems to be a duplicate of #217425

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 217425 ***