On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 13:04:23 +0200 (CEST), maintenance@opensuse.org said:
maintenance> openSUSE Recommended Update: texlive: roll up bugfix maintenance> update maintenance> ______________________________________________________________________________
maintenance> Announcement ID: openSUSE-RU-2013:1299-1 maintenance> Rating: moderate maintenance> References: #801727 #808731 #811162 #811258 #812286 #813032 maintenance> #814804 #819867 #823273 maintenance> Affected Products: maintenance> openSUSE 12.3 maintenance> ______________________________________________________________________________
maintenance> An update that has 9 recommended fixes can now be maintenance> installed.
In addition to the package update there are 106 new packages to be installed. I can understand the ones that are texlive-xxxx but common why on the earth I would like to install all the other devel packages on a machine which is not used for building sofware, that is what obs is for.
Here are the new packages that the patch wants to install:
font-util freeglut-devel gccmakedep glu-devel imake libdmx-devel libdrm-devel libfontenc-devel libFS6 libFS-devel libgbm-devel libICE-devel libkms-devel liblbxutil1 liblbxutil-devel liboldX6 liboldX-devel libOSMesa9 libOSMesa-devel libpciaccess-devel libpixman-1-0-devel libSM-devel libudev-devel libvnc-devel libVncExt2 libWindowsWM7 libWindowsWM-devel libX11-devel libXau-devel libXaw6 libXaw7 libXaw8 libXaw-devel libxcb-devel libxcb-dpms0 libxcb-record0 libxcb-res0 libxcb-screensaver0 libxcb-sync0 libxcb-xevie0 libxcb-xf86dri0 libxcb-xinerama0 libxcb-xprint0 libxcb-xtest0 libxcb-xvmc0 libXcliplist1 libXcliplist-devel libXcomposite-devel libXcursor-devel libXdamage-devel libXdmcp-devel libXevie-devel libXext-devel libXfixes-devel libXfontcache-devel libXfont-devel libXft-devel libXi-devel libXinerama-devel libxkbfile-devel libxkbui1 libxkbui-devel libXmu-devel libXp-devel libXpm-devel libXprintAppUtil1 libXprintAppUtil-devel libXprintUtil-devel libXrandr-devel libXrender-devel libXres-devel libXScrnSaver-devel libXt-devel libXTrap6 libXTrap-devel libXtst-devel libXv-devel libXvMC-devel libXxf86dga-devel libXxf86misc-devel libXxf86vm-devel lndir makedepend Mesa-devel Mesa-libEGL-devel Mesa-libglapi-devel Mesa-libGL-devel Mesa-libGLESv1_CM1 Mesa-libGLESv1_CM-devel Mesa-libGLESv2-devel Mesa-libIndirectGL1 Mesa-libIndirectGL-devel python-xcb-proto-devel texlive-environ texlive-media9 texlive-movie15 texlive-preview texlive-pst-pdf xbitmaps-devel xcb-util-devel xorg-cf-files xorg-sgml-doctools xorg-x11-devel xorg-x11-proto-devel xorg-x11-util-devel xtrans
maintenance> References:
maintenance> https://bugzilla.novell.com/801727 maintenance> https://bugzilla.novell.com/808731 maintenance> https://bugzilla.novell.com/811162 maintenance> https://bugzilla.novell.com/811258 maintenance> https://bugzilla.novell.com/812286 maintenance> https://bugzilla.novell.com/813032 maintenance> https://bugzilla.novell.com/814804 maintenance> https://bugzilla.novell.com/819867 maintenance> https://bugzilla.novell.com/823273
* Togan Muftuoglu toganm@opensuse.org [08-05-13 18:17]:
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 13:04:23 +0200 (CEST), maintenance@opensuse.org said:
maintenance> openSUSE Recommended Update: texlive: roll up bugfix maintenance> update maintenance> ______________________________________________________________________________ maintenance> Announcement ID: openSUSE-RU-2013:1299-1 maintenance> Rating: moderate maintenance> References: #801727 #808731 #811162 #811258 #812286 #813032 maintenance> #814804 #819867 #823273 maintenance> Affected Products: maintenance> openSUSE 12.3 maintenance> ______________________________________________________________________________ maintenance> An update that has 9 recommended fixes can now be maintenance> installed. In addition to the package update there are 106 new packages to be installed. I can understand the ones that are texlive-xxxx but common why on the earth I would like to install all the other devel packages on a machine which is not used for building sofware, that is what obs is for. Here are the new packages that the patch wants to install:
font-util freeglut-devel gccmakedep glu-devel imake libdmx-devel libdrm-devel
[...]
I went ahead with the update and then deleted all *-devel packages except kernel related for video driver.
The following package is going to be downgraded: texlive-asymptote 2012.67.2.21svn29349-4.6.1 -> 2012.60.2.13svn23068-4.2.1
1 package to downgrade, 123 to remove. Overall download size: 279.7 KiB. After the operation, 266.8 MiB will be freed.
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 18:58:19 -0400, Patrick Shanahan paka@opensuse.us said:
Patrick> * Togan Muftuoglu toganm@opensuse.org [08-05-13 18:17]: >> >>>>> On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 13:04:23 +0200 (CEST), >> maintenance@opensuse.org said: >> maintenance> openSUSE Recommended Update: texlive: roll up bugfix update maintenance> ______________________________________________________________________________ >> maintenance> Announcement ID: openSUSE-RU-2013:1299-1 maintenance> Rating: moderate maintenance> References: #801727 #808731 #811162 #811258 #812286 #813032 maintenance> #814804 #819867 #823273 maintenance> Affected Products: maintenance> openSUSE 12.3 maintenance> ______________________________________________________________________________ >> maintenance> An update that has 9 recommended fixes can now be installed. >> >> In addition to the package update there are 106 new packages to be >> installed. I can understand the ones that are texlive-xxxx but common why >> on the earth I would like to install all the other devel packages on a >> machine which is not used for building sofware, that is what obs is for. >> >> Here are the new packages that the patch wants to install: >> >> font-util freeglut-devel gccmakedep glu-devel imake libdmx-devel libdrm-devel Patrick> [...]
Patrick> I went ahead with the update and then deleted all *-devel Patrick> packages except kernel related for video driver.
Yes, that can be done but to me the update is broken, why would I be in need to delete unneeded devel packages. The update package should not be installing these in the first places.
I filed a bug against it bnc# 833498