On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:10:04 -0400 (EDT) "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday(a)crashcourse.ca&gt; wrote: > > been seeing numerous examples of this since yesterday: > > Error: Package: 1:libreoffice-math-4.2.3.3-3.fc21.x86_64 (rawhide) > Requires: libsaxlo.so()(64bit) > Removing: 1:libreoffice-core-4.2.3.3-1.fc21.x86_64 > (@rawhide) libsaxlo.so()(64bit) > Updated By: 1:libreoffice-core-4.2.3.3-3.fc21.x86_64 > (rawhide) Not found > > > any idea when this is going to be resolved? Tomorrow's compose. This build should fix it: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=510603

On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 15:18:21 -0400 (EDT) "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday(a)crashcourse.ca&gt; wrote: > On Mon, 14 Apr 2014, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:10:04 -0400 (EDT) > > "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday(a)crashcourse.ca&gt; wrote: > > > > > > > > been seeing numerous examples of this since yesterday: > > > > > > Error: Package: 1:libreoffice-math-4.2.3.3-3.fc21.x86_64 (rawhide) > > > Requires: libsaxlo.so()(64bit) > > > Removing: 1:libreoffice-core-4.2.3.3-1.fc21.x86_64 > > > (@rawhide) libsaxlo.so()(64bit) > > > Updated By: 1:libreoffice-core-4.2.3.3-3.fc21.x86_64 > > > (rawhide) Not found > > > > > > > > > any idea when this is going to be resolved? > > > > Tomorrow's compose. This build should fix it: > > > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=510603 > > ok. on related topic, i know that doing the occasional rawhide > update will have dependency errors like this -- it just happens. but > is there some record of this somewhere so that i can check that > someone has already made a note of this and it's being addressed? i > feel silly asking about it when i'm pretty sure someone has already > noticed it and is working on it. thanks. The daily 'rawhide report' lists all the ones that were known by the compose script at compose time. That email goes to test and devel lists. Additionally, if a dep issue appears in the rawhide report, it also mails the maintainer(s) of the packages with the issues. So, if it appears there it's going to the maintainers as well... If a problem persists or is particularly bad (a very base package breaking a lot of things or an important security update blocked by the issue, etc), then it's probibly worth filing a bug and/or bringing it up on list to get more folks looking at it.