<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 19:47:30 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">So, there are no repos that offer updates for those three packages?
Or is fedup unable to handle 3rd party repos?
Other than that, please don't add my name to the mail's subject line
in such a misleading/ambiguous way. Thank you.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
My apologies for leaving your name in the Subject line. It was a
copy paste error that has been perpetuated as others have replied.
<br>
<br>
The RPMFusion repos do have the proper VirtualBox packages, so it
seems that fedup is not looking at the 3rd party repos that I have
configured. <br>
<br>
Interestingly, I found this on the Fedora FedUp Wiki page:<br>
<br>
<blockquote> <span class="mw-headline"
id="Will_packages_in_third_party_repositories_be_upgraded.3F"><b>
Will packages in third party repositories be upgraded?</b> </span><br>
<p>Yes, if they are set up like regular yum repositories and do
not hard code the repository path. Commonly-used third party
repositories usually work fine, but if you attempt to upgrade
prior to or soon after an official Fedora release, they may not
have updated their repository paths yet, and FedUp may be unable
to find their packages. This will usually not prevent the
upgrade running successfully, though, and you can update the
packages from the third-party repository later.
</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
After reading this, I checked my RPMFusion repos and found that none
are hard-coded. All are using the $releasever variable, and all
resolve to valid repos with the proper packages available. My
assumption is that something isn't working as described.<br>
<br>
<br>
Brian<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>