[packman] libav versions

[packman at howorth.org.uk]

On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 17:11:44 +0200
Manfred Hollstein <manfred.h at gmx.net> wrote:

>Moin,
>
>On Tue, 25 Jun 2019, 16:56:48 +0200, packman at howorth.org.uk wrote:
>> On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 15:35:27 +0200
>> Manfred Hollstein <manfred.h at gmx.net> wrote:
>>   
>> >Moin,
>> >
>> >On Tue, 25 Jun 2019, 15:17:34 +0200, packman at howorth.org.uk wrote:  
>> >> I just looked and noticed that I have three versions of all
>> >> (AFAICT) of the libav* packages. e.g:
>> >> 
>> >> libavformat56
>> >> libavformat57
>> >> libavformat58
>> >> 
>> >> Most of them have numbers 56,57,58 in the name. Some have 2,3,4 or
>> >> 5,6,7
>> >> 
>> >> Do I need or benefit in some way from having all three? Or should
>> >> I just have the latest version (4.0.2.lp150...)?
>> >> 
>> >> If this is all documented somewhere, I apologize for not finding
>> >> it.    
>> >
>> >you can figure out this yourself:
>> >
>> >  rpm -e --test $(locate libavformat56)
>> >  rpm -e --test $(locate libavformat57)
>> >  rpm -e --test $(locate libavformat58)
>> >
>> >Every command will moan about a package still requiring the
>> >libavformat to be removed. Only if no other package requires it,
>> >i.e. the output from the related command is empty, you can remove
>> >the package (i.e. remove the "--test" from the command line).  
>> 
>> Thanks. All three versions produce output similar to
>> 
>> # rpm -e --test $(locate libavformat56)
>> error: package /usr/share/licenses/libavformat56 is not installed
>> error: package /usr/share/licenses/libavformat56/COPYING.GPLv2 is
>> not installed error:
>> package /usr/share/licenses/libavformat56/LICENSE.md is not installed
>> 
>> I'm not sure what that means (never used locate before and don't know
>> much about rpm.  
>
>OK, probably my fault. Just try running the commands _without_ the
>locate thing:
>
>  rpm -e --test libavformat56
>  rpm -e --test libavformat57
>  rpm -e --test libavformat58

Those all have dependencies on various other packages in the libav
family. libavdevice?? seems more fundamental but gives me a surprising
result:

# rpm -e --test libavdevice56
# rpm -e --test libavdevice57
error: Failed dependencies:
	libavdevice.so.57()(64bit) is needed by (installed) libmpv1-0.27.2-lp150.4.2.x86_64
	libavdevice.so.57()(64bit) is needed by (installed) mpv-0.27.2-lp150.4.2.x86_64
	libavdevice.so.57()(64bit) is needed by (installed) libav-tools-12.3-lp150.1.1.x86_64
	libavdevice.so.57()(64bit) is needed by (installed) libmlt6-modules-6.10.0-lp150.11.2.x86_64
	libavdevice.so.57()(64bit) is needed by (installed) ffmpeg-3-3.4.4-lp150.9.4.x86_64
	libavdevice.so.57(LIBAVDEVICE_57)(64bit) is needed by (installed) libmpv1-0.27.2-lp150.4.2.x86_64
	libavdevice.so.57(LIBAVDEVICE_57)(64bit) is needed by (installed) mpv-0.27.2-lp150.4.2.x86_64
	libavdevice.so.57(LIBAVDEVICE_57)(64bit) is needed by (installed) libav-tools-12.3-lp150.1.1.x86_64
	libavdevice.so.57(LIBAVDEVICE_57)(64bit) is needed by (installed) libmlt6-modules-6.10.0-lp150.11.2.x86_64
	libavdevice.so.57(LIBAVDEVICE_57)(64bit) is needed by (installed) ffmpeg-3-3.4.4-lp150.9.4.x86_64
	libavdevice57 = 3.4.4-lp150.9.4 is needed by (installed) ffmpeg-3-3.4.4-lp150.9.4.x86_64
# rpm -e --test libavdevice58
#

As far as I can see, libavformat56 and friends are not used by
anything. 57 is used by a lot of stuff and 58 is also used by some
things, but for some reason they don't use libavdevice58.

Does that sound plausible?

So I can delete the *56 packages in the correct order.

Thanks again, Dave

>Cheers.
>
>l8er
>manfred