Issue 125485 - openoffice4.1.1-freedesktop-menus rpm does not install on top of previous version
Summary: openoffice4.1.1-freedesktop-menus rpm does not install on top of previous ver...
Status: CONFIRMED
Alias: None
Product: Installation
Classification: Application
Component: code (show other issues)
Version: 4.1.0
Hardware: PC Linux, all
: P3 Normal (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: AOO issues mailing list
QA Contact:
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2014-08-22 07:34 UTC by rgb
Modified: 2016-02-17 21:24 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Latest Confirmation in: 4.1.2
Developer Difficulty: ---

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description rgb 2014-08-22 07:34:21 UTC 
openSUSE 13.1 64 bits

When trying to install 4.1.1 with freedesktop-menus package on top of a 4.1.0 also installed with freedesktop-menus package, rpm gives an error and quits installation: 

The file /usr/share/mime/packages/apacheopenoffice.xml from openoffice4.1.1-freedesktop-menus-4.1.1-9775.noarch conflicts with the package openoffice4.1-freedesktop-menus-4.1-9764.noarch

Uninstalling openoffice4.1-freedesktop-menus-4.1-9764.noarch and trying again, the installation proceeds without problems

Actual error message (openoffice4.1.1-freedesktop-menus-4.1.1-9775.noarch was copied to the folder with the other rpms before issuing the rpm command):

# rpm -Uvh *.rpm
Preparando...                         ################################# [100%]
        el archivo /usr/share/mime/packages/apacheopenoffice.xml de la instalación de openoffice4.1.1-freedesktop-menus-4.1.1-9775.noarch entra en conflicto con el archivo del paquete openoffice4.1-freedesktop-menus-4.1-9764.noarch
Comment 1 Kay 2016-02-17 21:21:13 UTC 
Adding new search engines is still a problem. Does information exist for the prefix and suffix portions when adding new search engines?
Comment 2 Kay 2016-02-17 21:24:13 UTC 
(In reply to Kay from comment #1)
> Adding new search engines is still a problem. Does information exist for the
> prefix and suffix portions when adding new search engines?

please IGNORE This comment. I posted to the wrong issue.