Does anyone know what's up with:
Error: Package: marco-1.8.3-1.el7.x86_64 (epel)
Requires: libgtop-2.0.so.10()(64bit)
Isn't the EPEL package built against stock Centos?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com
------------ Original Message ------------> Date: Thursday, March 26, 2015 16:05:16 -0500 > From: Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> > To: CentOS <centos at centos.org> > Subject: [CentOS] MATE desktop dependency? > > Does anyone know what's up with: > > Error: Package: marco-1.8.3-1.el7.x86_64 (epel) > Requires: libgtop-2.0.so.10()(64bit) > > Isn't the EPEL package built against stock Centos?Check epel-testing, that's where it (still) was a few days ago I believe. [I don't have my C7 laptop on so can't confirm things quickly.] - Richard
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Richard <lists-centos at listmail.innovate.net> wrote:> >> >> Does anyone know what's up with: >> >> Error: Package: marco-1.8.3-1.el7.x86_64 (epel) >> Requires: libgtop-2.0.so.10()(64bit) >> >> Isn't the EPEL package built against stock Centos? > > > Check epel-testing, that's where it (still) was a few days ago I > believe. [I don't have my C7 laptop on so can't confirm things > quickly.] >Thanks, but it doesn't help to --enablerepo=epel-testing. The libgtop2 package should be from the base repo anyway. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com
On 03/26/2015 04:05 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:> Does anyone know what's up with: > > Error: Package: marco-1.8.3-1.el7.x86_64 (epel) > Requires: libgtop-2.0.so.10()(64bit) > > Isn't the EPEL package built against stock Centos? >EPEL is built against RHEL, not CentOS (I am fairly certain). -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20150326/3a552f21/attachment-0001.sig>