Note: This is a beta release of Red Hat Bugzilla 5.0. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Also email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback here.
Bug 455647 - With new firefox errata, nspluginwrapper won't install
Summary: With new firefox errata, nspluginwrapper won't install
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 455601
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5
Classification: Red Hat
Component: nspluginwrapper
Version: 5.2
Hardware: i386
OS: Linux
low
medium
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Martin Stransky
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2008-07-16 19:24 UTC by Troy Dawson
Modified: 2008-07-16 19:38 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-07-16 19:38:06 UTC
Target Upstream Version:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Troy Dawson 2008-07-16 19:24:41 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9b5) Gecko/2008052212 Red Hat/3.0b5-0.beta5.6.el5 Firefox/3.0b5

Description of problem:
On a RHEL5 system that is up to date with the latest firefox 3.0.1 update, you cannot install nspluginwrapper.
On a RHEL5 system that already has nspluginwrapper, you cannot update the latest security updates for firefox.
For both of them you get the following error from yum

Error: Missing Dependency: gecko-libs = 1.9 is needed by package nspluginwrapper



Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
nspluginwrapper-0.9.91.5-21.el5

How reproducible:
Always


Steps to Reproduce:
1.Update your RHEL5 system so that it has the latest firefox 3.0.1
2.Try to install nspluginwrapper
3.

Actual Results:
Error: Missing Dependency: gecko-libs = 1.9 is needed by package nspluginwrapper



Expected Results:
It should have installed nspluginwrapper

Additional info:
I've tried this on both 32 bit and 64 bit.

Comment 1 Martin Stransky 2008-07-16 19:38:06 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 455601 ***


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.