3:49 a.m.
Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
distro-sync
This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal potential problems.
You may also run `dnf
upgrade` before running this command.
If you have have rdma-core.i686 installed you have to pass `--allowerasing`.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919864
If you get this prompt:
...
Total download size: XXX M
Is this ok [y/N]:
you can answer N and nothing happens, no need to test the actual upgrade.
But very likely you get some dependency problem now. In that case, please report it
against the appropriate package. Or
against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in Fedora 34. Please
check existing reports against
fedora-obsolete-packages first:
https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" reports:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=F34FailsToInstall
Thank you
P.S. sent from workstation successfully upgraded to F34 :)
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Associate Manager, Community Packaging Tools, #brno, #fedora-buildsys
4:05 a.m.
On Saturday, February 20, 2021 9:49:12 AM WET Miroslav Suchý wrote:
If you get this prompt:
...
Total download size: XXX M
Is this ok [y/N]:
you can answer N and nothing happens, no need to test the actual upgrade.
Oops, I got this.
...
Transaction Summary
========================
Install 198 Packages
Upgrade 7430 Packages
Remove 4 Packages
Downgrade 46 Packages
Where should I report this bug? After all the normal is to get, as you stated,
a dependency problem. So I guess that this can be counted as a bug. ;-)
Thank you for all the hard work. :-)
--
José Abílio
6:13 a.m.
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 10:05:53AM +0000, José Abílio Matos wrote:
On Saturday, February 20, 2021 9:49:12 AM WET Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> If you get this prompt:
>
> ...
> Total download size: XXX M
> Is this ok [y/N]:
>
> you can answer N and nothing happens, no need to test the actual upgrade.
Oops, I got this.
...
Transaction Summary
========================
Install 198 Packages
Upgrade 7430 Packages
Remove 4 Packages
Downgrade 46 Packages
Where should I report this bug?
Looks OK. It is allowed for packages to be downgraded, if that's
what you meant as a bug.
Zbyszek
2:32 p.m.
On Saturday, February 20, 2021 12:13:05 PM WET Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
Looks OK. It is allowed for packages to be downgraded, if that's
what you meant as a bug.
Zbyszek
No the bug was that it worked. :-)
Since there were no failures that went against my expectation and thus the
bug. :-D
It is the first time where I have no problem with dependencies at this stage,
well done to the people who have been chasing this class of problems.
--
José Abílio
2:58 p.m.
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 08:32:34PM +0000, José Abílio Matos wrote:
On Saturday, February 20, 2021 12:13:05 PM WET Zbigniew
Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> Looks OK. It is allowed for packages to be downgraded, if that's
> what you meant as a bug.
>
> Zbyszek
No the bug was that it worked. :-)
Since there were no failures that went against my expectation and thus the
bug. :-D
It is the first time where I have no problem with dependencies at this stage,
well done to the people who have been chasing this class of problems.
;)
Zbyszek
4:19 a.m.
On 20. 02. 21 10:49, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and try
to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
distro-sync
...
Thank you
P.S. sent from workstation successfully upgraded to F34 :)
Awesome, I got just one issue with the vcmi package from rpmfusion, but a fix is
pending testing \o/
But I guess many packages were not properly retired yet from Fedora 34:
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10029#comment-716723
P.S. Thanks for regurally staring this thread!
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
5:10 a.m.
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 11:19 AM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 20. 02. 21 10:49, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and try
> to run:
>
> # Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
> # next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
> sudo dnf module reset '*'
>
> sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
> --enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
> distro-sync
>
> ...
>
> Thank you
>
> P.S. sent from workstation successfully upgraded to F34 :)
Awesome, I got just one issue with the vcmi package from rpmfusion, but a fix is
pending testing \o/
But I guess many packages were not properly retired yet from Fedora 34:
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10029#comment-716723
P.S. Thanks for regurally staring this thread!
I concur, thanks for regularly doing this.
Interestingly enough, I see a lot of package downgrades from
up-to-date f33 to f34 (285 binary package downgrades, to be exact).
(Yeah, I ran my handy script again).
Some of those are probably down to either F34FTBFS or timing issues
(updated builds getting pushed to f33 mirrors faster than to f34
mirrors). However, I suspect a lot of them are (again) caused by
packagers missing the f34 branch point (sigh). Would people be
interested in the concrete list of package downgrades?
Fabio
5:45 a.m.
On 20/2/21 06:49, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled
again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
distro-sync
Can we add --assumeno to the command line to avoid the prompt?
This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will
reveal
potential problems. You may also run `dnf upgrade` before running this
command.
If you have have rdma-core.i686 installed you have to pass
`--allowerasing`.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919864
If you get this prompt:
...
Total download size: XXX M
Is this ok [y/N]:
you can answer N and nothing happens, no need to test the actual upgrade.
But very likely you get some dependency problem now. In that case,
please report it against the appropriate package. Or against
fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in Fedora
34. Please check existing reports against
fedora-obsolete-packages first:
https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" reports:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=F34FailsToInstall
Thank you
P.S. sent from workstation successfully upgraded to F34 :)
I get this:
Error:
Problem: rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686 has inferior architecture
- rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- problem with installed package rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
It doesn't look like a problem with fedora-obsolete package unless there
was a specific decision to stop shipping rdma-core.i686
Pablo.
6:19 a.m.
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 08:45:58AM -0300, Pablo Sebastián Greco wrote:
On 20/2/21 06:49, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
> --enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
> distro-sync
>
Can we add --assumeno to the command line to avoid the prompt?
That's a good idea.
>If you have have rdma-core.i686 installed you have to pass
>`--allowerasing`.
>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919864
Error:
Problem: rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686 has inferior architecture
- rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- problem with installed package rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
See the quote above.
Zbyszek
6:31 a.m.
On 20/2/21 09:19, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 08:45:58AM -0300, Pablo Sebastián Greco
wrote:
> On 20/2/21 06:49, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>> sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
>> --enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
>> distro-sync
>>
> Can we add --assumeno to the command line to avoid the prompt?
That's a good idea.
>> If you have have rdma-core.i686 installed you have to pass
>> `--allowerasing`.
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919864
> Error:
> Problem: rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686 has inferior architecture
> - rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
> repository
> - problem with installed package rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686
> (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
See the quote above.
Wow, don't know how I missed that :D, thanks
No more errors after that:
Transaction Summary
================
Install 41 Packages
Upgrade 2609 Packages
Remove 6 Packages
Downgrade 51 Packages
> Zbyszek
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
7:57 a.m.
Error:
Problem: package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_anal.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_asm.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_bin.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_bp.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_config.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_cons.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_core.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_crypto.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_debug.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_egg.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_flag.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_fs.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_hash.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_io.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_parse.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_reg.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_search.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_syscall.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_util.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- problem with installed package cutter-re-1.11.0-2.fc33.x86_64
- radare2-4.5.0-2.fc33.1.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- cutter-re-1.11.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 1:31 PM Pablo Sebastián Greco <
pablo(a)fliagreco.com.ar> wrote:
On 20/2/21 09:19, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 08:45:58AM -0300, Pablo Sebastián Greco wrote:
>> On 20/2/21 06:49, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>>> sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
>>> --enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular
\
>>> distro-sync
>>>
>> Can we add --assumeno to the command line to avoid the prompt?
> That's a good idea.
>
>>> If you have have rdma-core.i686 installed you have to pass
>>> `--allowerasing`.
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919864
>> Error:
>> Problem: rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686 has inferior architecture
>> - rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
>> repository
>> - problem with installed package rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686
>> (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
> See the quote above.
Wow, don't know how I missed that :D, thanks
No more errors after that:
Transaction Summary
================
Install 41 Packages
Upgrade 2609 Packages
Remove 6 Packages
Downgrade 51 Packages
> Zbyszek
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
--
*Chedi Toueiti*
* Due to the constant fluctuation in customer personalities, we cannot be
responsible for the mental stability of any one member of our staff.
** My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.
*** I always try to go the extra mile at work, but my boss always finds me
and brings me back.
8:26 a.m.
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 02:57:19PM +0100, chedi toueiti wrote:
Error:
Problem: package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_anal.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_asm.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_bin.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_bp.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_config.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_cons.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_core.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_crypto.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_debug.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_egg.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_flag.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_fs.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_hash.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_io.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_parse.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_reg.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_search.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_syscall.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package cutter-re-1.11.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires
libr_util.so.4.5.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- problem with installed package cutter-re-1.11.0-2.fc33.x86_64
- radare2-4.5.0-2.fc33.1.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- cutter-re-1.11.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1929231
6:02 a.m.
Apart from the rdma-core.i686 issue, just four package downgrades:
- abrt-java-connector - from 1.2.0-5.fc33 to 1.2.0-2.fc34
- clang9.0-libs - from 9.0.1-9.fc33 to 9.0.1-5.fc32
- fuse-overlayfs - from 1.4.0-1.fc33 to 1.4+dev-2.dev.gitee8ce2e.fc34
- gnome-abrt - from 1.3.6-5.fc33 to 1.3.6-2.fc34
clang9.0 is caused by an unfixed FTBFS.
abrt-java-connector and gnome-abrt seem to be caused by abrt-related packages being
rebuilt alongside reportd for F33; these changes are not present in f34, nor in rawhide
branch.
fuse-overlayfs is weird, 'cause the f33 branch contains mostly stable versions, while
f34 and rawhide has only commits for snapshots.
9:58 a.m.
❯ sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
distro-sync --allowerasing
All fine, but few packages wants to downgrade:
conmon x86_64
2:2.0.22-0.9.dev.git2fbeb9f.fc34 fedora
48 k
fuse-overlayfs x86_64
1.4+dev-2.dev.gitee8ce2e.fc34 fedora
76 k
httpd x86_64
2.4.46-8.fc34 fedora
1.4 M
httpd-filesystem noarch
2.4.46-8.fc34 fedora
13 k
httpd-tools x86_64
2.4.46-8.fc34 fedora
82 k
libusbx i686
1.0.23-3.fc34 fedora
75 k
libusbx x86_64
1.0.23-3.fc34 fedora
71 k
mod_lua x86_64
2.4.46-8.fc34 fedora
62 k
7:42 a.m.
On Sat, 20 Feb 2021 at 09:49, Miroslav Suchý <msuchy(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time
and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled
again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
distro-sync
This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal
potential problems. You may also run `dnf
upgrade` before running this command.
If you have have rdma-core.i686 installed you have to pass
`--allowerasing`.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919864
If you get this prompt:
...
Total download size: XXX M
Is this ok [y/N]:
you can answer N and nothing happens, no need to test the actual upgrade.
But very likely you get some dependency problem now. In that case, please
report it against the appropriate package. Or
against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in
Fedora 34. Please check existing reports against
fedora-obsolete-packages first:
https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" reports:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=F34FailsToInstall
Thank you
P.S. sent from workstation successfully upgraded to F34 :)
All worked as expected /described.
Linux Y03222 5.11.0-156.fc34.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Feb 17 08:31:59 UTC 2021
x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Cheers all round :beers:
10:39 a.m.
Error:
Problem 1: libnghttp2-1.41.0-3.fc33.i686 has inferior architecture
- libnghttp2-1.41.0-3.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package libnghttp2-1.41.0-3.fc33.i686
Problem 2: rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686 has inferior architecture
- rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686
Problem 3: package NetworkManager-ovs-1:1.30.0-1.fc34.x86_64 requires openvswitch, but
none of the providers can be installed
Problem 4: package gnome-tour-40~beta-3.fc34.x86_64 obsoletes gnome-getting-started-docs
< 3.38.1-2 provided by gnome-getting-started-docs-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
- package gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch requires
gnome-getting-started-docs = 3.38.0-2.fc34, but none of the providers can be installed
- problem with installed package gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64
- problem with installed package gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.1-1.fc33.noarch
- gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.1-1.fc33.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
if I add it --allowerasing because I'v got rdma-core.i686 installed: I obtain
NetworkManager-ovs x86_64 1:1.26.6-1.fc33
@updates-testing 76 k
elfutils-debuginfod-client i686 0.183-1.fc33
@updates-testing 45 k
gnome-initial-setup x86_64 3.38.4-1.fc33
@updates-testing 2.3 M
gnome-tour x86_64 3.38.0-2.fc33
@updates 3.9 M
libcurl i686 7.71.1-8.fc33
@updates-testing 654 k
libgphoto2 i686 2.5.26-1.fc33
@updates-testing 5.7 M
libnghttp2 i686 1.41.0-3.fc33
@fedora 162 k
openvswitch x86_64 2.14.0-2.fc33
@updates 5.3 M
rdma-core i686 33.0-2.fc33
@updates-testing 114 k
sane-backends-drivers-cameras i686 1.0.32-2.fc33
@updates-testing 56 k
wine x86_64 6.2-1.fc33
@updates-testing 0
wine-core i686 6.2-1.fc33
@updates-testing 464 M
wine is going to be deleted because Error number 1. -> libnghttp2 from Modular..... the
same behaviour in f33... when I've tried to update:
but the system allow me to upgrade..... with this comment I commented before....
This is the dnf update in a normal f33:
Dependencies resolved.
Problem: cannot install both libnghttp2-1.42.0-1.module_f33+10908+f8d680ef.x86_64 and
libnghttp2-1.41.0-3.fc33.x86_64
- libnghttp2-1.41.0-3.fc33.i686 has inferior architecture
- cannot install the best update candidate for package libnghttp2-1.41.0-3.fc33.x86_64
- problem with installed package libnghttp2-1.41.0-3.fc33.i686
- package libnghttp2-1.41.0-3.fc33.x86_64 is filtered out by modular filtering
=======================================================================================================================================================
Package Architecture Version
Repository Size
=======================================================================================================================================================
Skipping packages with conflicts:
(add '--best --allowerasing' to command line to force their upgrade):
libnghttp2 x86_64 1.42.0-1.module_f33+10908+f8d680ef
updates-modular 76
Aditional info:
LANG=C dnf info libnghttp2
keybase
35 kB/s | 3.3 kB 00:00
Installed Packages
Name : libnghttp2
Version : 1.41.0
Release : 3.fc33
Architecture : i686
Size : 162 k
Source : nghttp2-1.41.0-3.fc33.src.rpm
Repository : @System
From repo : fedora
Summary : A library implementing the HTTP/2 protocol
URL : https://nghttp2.org/
License : MIT
Description : libnghttp2 is a library implementing the Hypertext Transfer Protocol
: version 2 (HTTP/2) protocol in C.
Name : libnghttp2
Version : 1.41.0
Release : 3.fc33
Architecture : x86_64
Size : 155 k
Source : nghttp2-1.41.0-3.fc33.src.rpm
Repository : @System
From repo : anaconda
Summary : A library implementing the HTTP/2 protocol
URL : https://nghttp2.org/
License : MIT
Description : libnghttp2 is a library implementing the Hypertext Transfer Protocol
: version 2 (HTTP/2) protocol in C.
Available Packages
Name : libnghttp2
Version : 1.42.0
Release : 1.module_f33+10908+f8d680ef
Architecture : x86_64
Size : 76 k
Source : nghttp2-1.42.0-1.module_f33+10908+f8d680ef.src.rpm
Repository : updates-modular
Summary : A library implementing the HTTP/2 protocol
URL : https://nghttp2.org/
License : MIT
Description : libnghttp2 is a library implementing the Hypertext Transfer Protocol
: version 2 (HTTP/2) protocol in C.
Regards.,
12:55 p.m.
Not sure if it's something weird with my system, but running that exact
command I get
Error: Unknown repo: 'updates-testing-modular'
Dropping the reference to updates-testing-modular gets me a couple of
removed packages (obviously the kernel modules are not an issue, but I
don't know what the others are for) along with some downgrades.
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34
--enablerepo=updates-testing --allowerasing distro-sync
<snip>
Removing:
kernel x86_64
5.10.14-200.fc33 @updates-testing
0
kernel-core x86_64
5.10.14-200.fc33 @updates-testing
74 M
kernel-debug-devel x86_64
5.10.14-200.fc33 @updates-testing
53 M
kernel-devel x86_64
5.10.14-200.fc33 @updates-testing
53 M
kernel-modules x86_64
5.10.14-200.fc33 @updates-testing
30 M
kernel-modules-extra x86_64
5.10.14-200.fc33 @updates-testing
1.9 M
Removing dependent packages:
NetworkManager-ovs x86_64
1:1.26.6-1.fc33
@updates-testing 76 k
axis noarch
1.4-34.fc27
@System 13 M
empathy x86_64
1:3.12.14-7.fc29
@fedora 15 M
kmod-nvidia-5.10.14-200.fc33.x86_64 x86_64
3:460.39-1.fc33
@@commandline 43 M
kmod-xpad-5.10.14-200.fc33.x86_64 x86_64
4.14-1.20170915gitbbc8608.fc33
@@commandline 58 k
openvswitch x86_64
2.14.0-2.fc33
@updates-testing 5.3 M
rdma-core i686
33.0-2.fc33
@updates-testing 114 k
Downgrading:
abrt-java-connector x86_64
1.2.0-2.fc34 fedora
46 k
balena-etcher-electron x86_64
1.5.99-1 etcher-rpm
60 M
blender x86_64
1:2.91.2-4.fc34 fedora
43 M
conmon x86_64
2:2.0.22-0.9.dev.git2fbeb9f.fc34 fedora
48 k
containernetworking-plugins x86_64
0.9.1-1.1.gitfa48f75.fc34 fedora
8.8 M
containers-common x86_64
1:1.2.1-28.dev.git1b813f8.fc34 fedora
79 k
firefox x86_64
85.0-11.fc34 fedora
102 M
fuse-overlayfs x86_64
1.4+dev-2.dev.gitee8ce2e.fc34 fedora
76 k
gecode x86_64
6.2.0-5.fc34 fedora
3.1 M
gnome-abrt x86_64
1.3.6-2.fc34 fedora
140 k
httpd x86_64
2.4.46-8.fc34 fedora
1.4 M
httpd-filesystem noarch
2.4.46-8.fc34 fedora
13 k
httpd-tools x86_64
2.4.46-8.fc34 fedora
82 k
libuv x86_64
1:1.40.0-2.fc34 fedora
152 k
libuv-devel x86_64
1:1.40.0-2.fc34 fedora
29 k
libuv-static x86_64
1:1.40.0-2.fc34 fedora
116 k
mod_lua x86_64
2.4.46-8.fc34 fedora
62 k
podman x86_64
2:3.0.0-0.204.dev.gita086f60.fc34 fedora
11 M
podman-docker noarch
2:3.0.0-0.204.dev.gita086f60.fc34 fedora
184 k
podman-plugins x86_64
2:3.0.0-0.204.dev.gita086f60.fc34 fedora
1.3 M
podman-remote x86_64
2:3.0.0-0.204.dev.gita086f60.fc34 fedora
8.6 M
reportd x86_64
0.7.4-4.fc34 fedora
50 k
strongswan x86_64
5.9.0-3.fc34 fedora
1.5 M
strongswan-charon-nm x86_64
5.9.0-3.fc34 fedora
34 k
On 2/20/21 3:49 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled
again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
distro-sync
This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal
potential problems. You may also run `dnf upgrade` before running this
command.
If you have have rdma-core.i686 installed you have to pass
`--allowerasing`.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919864
If you get this prompt:
...
Total download size: XXX M
Is this ok [y/N]:
you can answer N and nothing happens, no need to test the actual upgrade.
But very likely you get some dependency problem now. In that case,
please report it against the appropriate package. Or against
fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in Fedora
34. Please check existing reports against
fedora-obsolete-packages first:
https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" reports:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=F34FailsToInstall
Thank you
P.S. sent from workstation successfully upgraded to F34 :)
4:24 a.m.
On Sun, 21 Feb 2021 at 18:56, Micah Shennum <jimtahu(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Not sure if it's something weird with my system, but running that exact command I
get
Error: Unknown repo: 'updates-testing-modular'
Dropping the reference to updates-testing-modular gets me a couple of removed packages
(obviously the kernel modules are not an issue, but I don't know what the others are
for) along with some downgrades.
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34
--enablerepo=updates-testing --allowerasing distro-sync
Same issue for me, without the updates-testing-modular
Installing weak dependencies:
glibc-doc noarch 2.33-2.fc34
fedora 1.1 M
libcanberra-gtk2 i686 0.30-24.fc34
fedora 26 k
libcanberra-gtk2 x86_64 0.30-24.fc34
fedora 26 k
Removing:
kernel x86_64 5.10.14-200.fc33
@updates 0
kernel-core x86_64 5.10.14-200.fc33
@updates 74 M
kernel-devel x86_64 5.10.14-200.fc33
@updates 53 M
kernel-modules x86_64 5.10.14-200.fc33
@updates 30 M
kernel-modules-extra x86_64 5.10.14-200.fc33
@updates 1.9 M
Removing dependent packages:
rdma-core i686 33.0-2.fc33
@updates 114 k
Downgrading:
abrt-java-connector x86_64 1.2.0-2.fc34
fedora 46 k
chromium-freeworld x86_64
88.0.4324.96-1.fc34 rpmfusion-free
107 M
firefox x86_64 85.0-11.fc34
fedora 102 M
gnome-abrt x86_64 1.3.6-2.fc34
fedora 140 k
Transaction Summary
=====================================================================================================================================
Install 35 Packages
Upgrade 2679 Packages
Remove 6 Packages
Downgrade 4 Packages
--
"Never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give
in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to
force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the
enemy.''
Winston Churchill
https://stackoverflow.com/users/3670118/casep
4:52 p.m.
On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 10:24:41AM +0000, Carlos "casep" Sepulveda wrote:
On Sun, 21 Feb 2021 at 18:56, Micah Shennum <jimtahu(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Not sure if it's something weird with my system, but running that exact command
I get
>
> Error: Unknown repo: 'updates-testing-modular'
That's not an error really. You don't have 'fedora-repos-modular'
package installed, so this repository is not available. Miroslav's
command simply assumes that you have modules enabled.
> Dropping the reference to updates-testing-modular gets me a
couple of removed packages (obviously the kernel modules are not an issue, but I don't
know what the others are for) along with some downgrades.
>
> sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34
--enablerepo=updates-testing --allowerasing distro-sync
Same issue for me, without the updates-testing-modular
Installing weak dependencies:
glibc-doc noarch 2.33-2.fc34
fedora 1.1 M
libcanberra-gtk2 i686 0.30-24.fc34
fedora 26 k
libcanberra-gtk2 x86_64 0.30-24.fc34
fedora 26 k
Removing:
kernel x86_64 5.10.14-200.fc33
@updates 0
kernel-core x86_64 5.10.14-200.fc33
@updates 74 M
kernel-devel x86_64 5.10.14-200.fc33
@updates 53 M
kernel-modules x86_64 5.10.14-200.fc33
@updates 30 M
kernel-modules-extra x86_64 5.10.14-200.fc33
@updates 1.9 M
Removing dependent packages:
rdma-core i686 33.0-2.fc33
So that's the only one removed, which is fine.
We *do* want it to be removed, we're just trying how to make that happen
without requiring --allow-erasing
(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919864).
Zbyszek
2:29 a.m.
Dne 22. 02. 21 v 23:52 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
>> Error: Unknown repo: 'updates-testing-modular'
That's not an error really. You don't have 'fedora-repos-modular'
package installed, so this repository is not available. Miroslav's
command simply assumes that you have modules enabled.
*nod* Previously, it was part of fedora-repos and you could not remove it. Just disable.
Now you can remove it.
I will ammend fedora-upgrade script and next time the email.
Nice catch.
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Associate Manager, Community Packaging Tools, #brno, #fedora-buildsys
3:10 a.m.
On Sa, 2021-02-20 at 10:49 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
distro-sync
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
distro-sync
Fedora 34 openh264 (From Cisco) -
x86_64
365 B/s |
271 B 00:00
Errors during downloading metadata for repository 'fedora-cisco-openh264':
- Status code: 404 for
https://codecs.fedoraproject.org/openh264/34/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml (IP:
38.145.60.21)
Error: Failed to download metadata for repo 'fedora-cisco-openh264': Cannot
download repomd.xml: Cannot download repodata/repomd.xml: All mirrors were tried
Mhm, that was short:
Does that repo not exist anymore?
I can see it on the server, but the path has changed, is there no upgrade package
available which fixes wrong repo files?for the record, I'm running this on fully up to
date Fedora 32:
https://codecs.fedoraproject.org/openh264/34/x86_64/os/repodata/
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Regards
Sven Kieske
Systementwickler
Mittwald CM Service GmbH & Co. KG
Königsberger Straße 4-6
32339 Espelkamp
Tel.: 05772 / 293-900
Fax: 05772 / 293-333
https://www.mittwald.de
Geschäftsführer: Robert Meyer, Florian Jürgens
St.Nr.: 331/5721/1033, USt-IdNr.: DE814773217, HRA 6640, AG Bad Oeynhausen
Komplementärin: Robert Meyer Verwaltungs GmbH, HRB 13260, AG Bad Oeynhausen
Informationen zur Datenverarbeitung im Rahmen unserer Geschäftstätigkeit
gemäß Art. 13-14 DSGVO sind unter www.mittwald.de/ds abrufbar.
3:20 a.m.
On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 09:10:27AM +0000, Sven Kieske wrote:
On Sa, 2021-02-20 at 10:49 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and try to
run:
>
> # Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
> # next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
> sudo dnf module reset '*'
>
> sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
> --enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
> distro-sync
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
distro-sync
Fedora 34 openh264 (From Cisco) -
x86_64
365 B/s
|
271 B 00:00
Errors during downloading metadata for repository 'fedora-cisco-openh264':
- Status code: 404 for
https://codecs.fedoraproject.org/openh264/34/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml (IP:
38.145.60.21)
Error: Failed to download metadata for repo 'fedora-cisco-openh264': Cannot
download repomd.xml: Cannot download repodata/repomd.xml: All mirrors were tried
Mhm, that was short:
Does that repo not exist anymore?
I can see it on the server, but the path has changed, is there no upgrade package
available which fixes wrong repo files?for the record, I'm running this on fully up to
date Fedora 32:
https://codecs.fedoraproject.org/openh264/34/x86_64/os/repodata/
You probably have an outdated repository definition in /etc/yum.repos.d.
Your /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-cisco-openh264.repo should have following
line:
metalink=https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=fedora-cisco-ope...
Maybe there is a .rpmnew file and you are still using the old baseurl
based repository definition.
Adrian
4:41 a.m.
On Mo, 2021-02-22 at 10:20 +0100, Adrian Reber wrote:
You probably have an outdated repository definition in
/etc/yum.repos.d.
Your /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-cisco-openh264.repo should have following
line:
metalink=https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=fedora-cisco-ope...
Maybe there is a .rpmnew file and you are still using the old baseurl
based repository definition.
Thanks, that was indeed the case!
But now I get:
$ sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
distro-sync
Fedora 34 openh264 (From Cisco) -
x86_64
437 B/s |
566 B 00:01
Fedora 34 openh264 (From Cisco) -
x86_64
1.6 MB/s |
1.6
kB 00:00
GPG-Schlüssel 0x45719A39 wird importiert:
Benutzer-ID : »Fedora (34) <fedora-34-primary(a)fedoraproject.xn--org>-bka
Fingerabdruck: 8C5B A699 0BDB 26E1 9F2A 1A80 1161 AE69 4571 9A39
Von : /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-34-x86_64
Is this ok [y/N]: y
Fedora 34 openh264 (From Cisco) -
x86_64
1.8 kB/s |
2.5
kB 00:01
Fedora Modular 34 - x86_64 - Test
Updates
320 B/s |
257 B 00:00
Fedora 34 - x86_64 - Test
Updates
284
B/s |
257 B 00:00
Fedora 34 - x86_64 -
Updates
329 B/s |
257 B 00:00
Fedora 34 -
x86_64
9.2 MB/s
| 73 MB 00:07
Ring 34 - x86_64 -
ring
121 B/s |
196 B 00:01
Errors during downloading metadata for repository 'ring':
- Status code: 404 for https://dl.jami.net/ring-nightly/fedora_34/repodata/repomd.xml
(IP: 142.4.207.49)
Error: Failed to download metadata for repo 'ring': Cannot download repomd.xml:
Cannot download repodata/repomd.xml: All mirrors were tried
RPM Fusion for Fedora 34 - Free -
Updates
331 B/s |
257 B 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 34 -
Free
1.5
MB/s | 937
kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 34 - Nonfree -
Updates
271 B/s | 257
B 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 34 -
Nonfree
480
kB/s | 243
kB 00:00
Ignoriere Repositories: ring
Error:
Problem: package gnome-tour-40~beta-3.fc34.x86_64 obsoletes gnome-getting-started-docs
< 3.38.1-2 provided by gnome-getting-started-docs-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
- package gnome-initial-setup-40~beta-1.fc34.x86_64 requires gnome-tour, but none of the
providers can be installed
- package gnome-getting-started-docs-de-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch requires
gnome-getting-started-docs = 3.38.0-2.fc34, but none of the providers can be installed
- problem with installed package gnome-initial-setup-3.36.4-1.fc32.x86_64
- problem with installed package gnome-getting-started-docs-de-3.36.2-1.fc32.noarch
- gnome-initial-setup-3.36.4-1.fc32.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- gnome-getting-started-docs-de-3.36.2-1.fc32.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
FTR: This is a KDE Spin install, but I'm using some gnome packages.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Regards
Sven Kieske
Systementwickler
Mittwald CM Service GmbH & Co. KG
Königsberger Straße 4-6
32339 Espelkamp
Tel.: 05772 / 293-900
Fax: 05772 / 293-333
https://www.mittwald.de
Geschäftsführer: Robert Meyer, Florian Jürgens
St.Nr.: 331/5721/1033, USt-IdNr.: DE814773217, HRA 6640, AG Bad Oeynhausen
Komplementärin: Robert Meyer Verwaltungs GmbH, HRB 13260, AG Bad Oeynhausen
Informationen zur Datenverarbeitung im Rahmen unserer Geschäftstätigkeit
gemäß Art. 13-14 DSGVO sind unter www.mittwald.de/ds abrufbar.
3:45 a.m.
On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 10:41:01AM +0000, Sven Kieske wrote:
Error:
Problem: package gnome-tour-40~beta-3.fc34.x86_64 obsoletes gnome-getting-started-docs
< 3.38.1-2 provided by gnome-getting-started-docs-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
- package gnome-initial-setup-40~beta-1.fc34.x86_64 requires gnome-tour, but none of
the providers can be installed
- package gnome-getting-started-docs-de-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch requires
gnome-getting-started-docs = 3.38.0-2.fc34, but none of the providers can be installed
- problem with installed package gnome-initial-setup-3.36.4-1.fc32.x86_64
- problem with installed package gnome-getting-started-docs-de-3.36.2-1.fc32.noarch
- gnome-initial-setup-3.36.4-1.fc32.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- gnome-getting-started-docs-de-3.36.2-1.fc32.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gnome-tour/c/665b7da52787e1caa06256a34...
Building in rawhide now.
Zbyszek
3:37 a.m.
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 10:49:12 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
distro-sync
Error:
Problem 1: problem with installed package mpv-0.33.0-1.fc33.x86_64
- package mpv-0.33.0-3.fc34.x86_64 requires libplacebo.so.72()(64bit), but none of the
providers can be installed
- mpv-0.33.0-1.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- libplacebo-2.72.2-1.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
Problem 2: problem with installed package perf-5.10.11-200.fc33.x86_64
- package perf-5.11.0-0.rc7.git0.1.fc34.x86_64 requires libopencsd_c_api.so.0()(64bit),
but none of the providers can be installed
- perf-5.10.11-200.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- opencsd-0.14.1-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- mpv is from RPM Fusion: perhaps it needs a rebuild for libplacebo.
- not sure why I have perf installed in the first place, but I don't see
a bug for this yet either at kernel-tools or at opencsd.
--
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) |
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Time zone: Europe/London
4:02 a.m.
On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 09:37:26AM +0000, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Problem 2: problem with installed package
perf-5.10.11-200.fc33.x86_64
- package perf-5.11.0-0.rc7.git0.1.fc34.x86_64 requires libopencsd_c_api.so.0()(64bit),
but none of the providers can be installed
- perf-5.10.11-200.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- opencsd-0.14.1-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- mpv is from RPM Fusion: perhaps it needs a rebuild for libplacebo.
- not sure why I have perf installed in the first place, but I don't see
a bug for this yet either at kernel-tools or at opencsd.
It seems to be fixed already: dnf has perf-5.11.0-1.fc34 now.
Zbyszek
9:47 a.m.
Error:
Problem 1: package openmw-0.46.0-2.fc33.x86_64 requires
libboost_filesystem.so.1.73.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be
installed
- boost-filesystem-1.73.0-9.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a
distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package openmw-0.46.0-2.fc33.x86_64
Problem 2: rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686 has inferior architecture
- rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- problem with installed package rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686
Problem 3: package generic-release-common-34-0.1.noarch conflicts with
fedora-release-common provided by fedora-release-common-34-0.13.noarch
- problem with installed package fedora-release-common-33-3.noarch
- package
redhat-internal-NetworkManager-openvpn-profiles-non-gnome-0.1-30.el7.csb.noarch
requires redhat-release >= redhat-release-workstation-7.0-0.5, but none
of the providers can be installed
- fedora-release-common-33-3.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- problem with installed package
redhat-internal-NetworkManager-openvpn-profiles-non-gnome-0.1-30.el7.csb.noarch
On 20. 2. 2021 10:49, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled
again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
distro-sync
This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal
potential problems. You may also run `dnf upgrade` before running this
command.
If you have have rdma-core.i686 installed you have to pass
`--allowerasing`.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919864
If you get this prompt:
...
Total download size: XXX M
Is this ok [y/N]:
you can answer N and nothing happens, no need to test the actual upgrade.
But very likely you get some dependency problem now. In that case,
please report it against the appropriate package. Or against
fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in Fedora
34. Please check existing reports against
fedora-obsolete-packages first:
https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" reports:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=F34FailsToInstall
Thank you
P.S. sent from workstation successfully upgraded to F34 :)
--
Marián Konček
10:36 a.m.
sudo dnf module reset '*'
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
distro-sync
F32 x86_64 server:
Error:
Problem 1: package python3-blindspin-2.0.1-9.fc32.noarch requires python(abi) = 3.8, but
none of the providers can be installed
- python3-3.8.7-2.fc32.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package python3-blindspin-2.0.1-9.fc32.noarch
F33 x86_64 workstation #1:
Error:
Problem 1: problem with installed package
gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc33.x86_64
- package gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-pmt.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-runtime.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-audio.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-blocks.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- gnuradio-3.8.2.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
Problem 2: package gr-rds-1.1.0-14.20191111git649bb528.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-pmt.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package gr-rds-1.1.0-14.20191111git649bb528.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-runtime.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- problem with installed package gr-rds-1.1.0-14.20191111git649bb528.fc33.x86_64
- package gnuradio-3.8.2.0-2.fc33.x86_64 requires
libboost_filesystem.so.1.73.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- gr-rds-1.1.0-14.20191111git649bb528.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- boost-filesystem-1.73.0-9.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
F33 x86_64 laptop #1: (Essentially the same as the workstation above)
Problem 1: problem with installed package
gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc33.x86_64
- package gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-audio.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-blocks.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-pmt.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-runtime.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- gnuradio-3.8.2.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
Problem 2: package gr-rds-1.1.0-14.20191111git649bb528.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-pmt.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package gr-rds-1.1.0-14.20191111git649bb528.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-runtime.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- problem with installed package gr-rds-1.1.0-14.20191111git649bb528.fc33.x86_64
- package gnuradio-3.8.2.0-2.fc33.x86_64 requires
libboost_filesystem.so.1.73.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- gr-rds-1.1.0-14.20191111git649bb528.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- boost-filesystem-1.73.0-9.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
Problem 3: package gr-fcdproplus-doc-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.x86_64 requires
gr-fcdproplus = 3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34, but none of the providers can be
installed
- package gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-audio.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-blocks.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-pmt.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-runtime.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- problem with installed package
gr-fcdproplus-doc-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc33.x86_64
- package gnuradio-3.8.2.0-2.fc33.x86_64 requires
libboost_program_options.so.1.73.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- gr-fcdproplus-doc-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a
distupgrade repository
- boost-program-options-1.73.0-9.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- nothing provides libgnuradio-audio.so.3.8.2 needed by
gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.i686
- nothing provides libgnuradio-blocks.so.3.8.2 needed by
gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.i686
- nothing provides libgnuradio-pmt.so.3.8.2 needed by
gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.i686
- nothing provides libgnuradio-runtime.so.3.8.2 needed by
gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.i686
Successful F33->F34 test upgrades:
* Two x86_64 servers
* One x86_64 workstation
* One aarch64 (RPi) quasi-serer
Two x86_64 F33 servers upgraded fine
One aarch64 (RPi) F33 system upgraded fine
One x86_64 workstation upgraded fine
(I have two more systems I can test with, but they're nearly stock
Fedora Workstation installs, so I don't anticipate any issues)
- Solomon
--
Solomon Peachy pizza at shaftnet dot org (email&xmpp)
@pizza:shaftnet dot org (matrix)
High Springs, FL speachy (freenode)
3:54 a.m.
On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 11:36:45AM -0500, Solomon Peachy wrote:
> sudo dnf module reset '*'
>
> sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
> --enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
> distro-sync
F32 x86_64 server:
Error:
Problem 1: package python3-blindspin-2.0.1-9.fc32.noarch requires python(abi) = 3.8, but
none of the providers can be installed
- python3-3.8.7-2.fc32.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package python3-blindspin-2.0.1-9.fc32.noarch
It got retired after being orphaned for 6+ weeks. I'll add to
fedora-obsolete-packages.
F33 x86_64 workstation #1:
Error:
Problem 1: problem with installed package
gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc33.x86_64
- package gr-fcdproplus-3.8.0-3.20200807git06069c2e.fc34.x86_64 requires
libgnuradio-pmt.so.3.8.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
gnuradio has libgnuradio-pmt.so.3.9.0()(64bit), gr-fcdproplus needs a rebuild.
Zbyszek
2:26 a.m.
Dne 22. 02. 21 v 16:47 Marián Konček napsal(a):
Error:
Problem 2: rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686 has inferior architecture
- rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686
> If you have have rdma-core.i686 installed you have to pass
`--allowerasing`.
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919864
^^^^^ This.
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Associate Manager, Community Packaging Tools, #brno, #fedora-buildsys
6:15 p.m.
On Sat, 2021-02-20 at 10:49 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled
again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular
\
distro-sync
Looks like I still have the empathy package (I do actually still use it
) but learned today it was retired/orphaned/obsoleted awhile ago. Any
idea why its still on my system?
Fedora Modular 34 - x86_64 - Updates 45 kB/s | 13 kB
Fedora Modular 34 - x86_64 - Test Updates 79 kB/s | 13 kB
Fedora 34 - x86_64 - Test Updates 73 kB/s | 13 kB
Fedora 34 - x86_64 - Updates 78 kB/s | 13 kB
Errors during downloading metadata for repository 'noblet':
- Status code: 404 for
https://yum.noblet.ca/fedora/34/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml (IP:
144.217.182.3)
Error: Failed to download metadata for repo 'noblet': Cannot download
repomd.xml: Cannot download repodata/repomd.xml: All mirrors were tried
Ignoring repositories: noblet
Error:
Problem: package empathy-1:3.12.14-7.fc29.x86_64 requires
libfolks.so.25()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- folks-1:0.14.0-5.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- problem with installed package empathy-1:3.12.14-7.fc29.x86_64
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
2:27 a.m.
Dne 23. 02. 21 v 1:15 Nathanael D. Noblet napsal(a):
Error:
Problem: package empathy-1:3.12.14-7.fc29.x86_64 requires
libfolks.so.25()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- folks-1:0.14.0-5.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- problem with installed package empathy-1:3.12.14-7.fc29.x86_64
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
If the package cause problem during an upgrade we are removing it using
fedora-obsolete-packages (please open an issue
there).
If it does not cause a problem during an upgrade we are just leaving it behind.
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Associate Manager, Community Packaging Tools, #brno, #fedora-buildsys
5:25 a.m.
On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 09:27:45AM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 23. 02. 21 v 1:15 Nathanael D. Noblet napsal(a):
>Error:
> Problem: package empathy-1:3.12.14-7.fc29.x86_64 requires
>libfolks.so.25()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
> - folks-1:0.14.0-5.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
>repository
> - problem with installed package empathy-1:3.12.14-7.fc29.x86_64
>(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
If the package cause problem during an upgrade we are removing it
using fedora-obsolete-packages (please open an issue there).
If it does not cause a problem during an upgrade we are just leaving it behind.
fedora-obsolete-packages-34-14 will remove it.
Zbyszek
8:01 a.m.
I tried here on a F33 kde spin (on bare metal Acer/intel notebook) and it
worked fine, just as expected:
Instalar 48 Pacotes
Atualizar 2019 Pacotes
Remover 5 Pacotes
Desatualizar 2 Pacotes
Tamanho total do download: 1.8 G
regards
Geraldo
FAS: geraldosimiao
Em sáb., 20 de fev. de 2021 às 06:49, Miroslav Suchý <msuchy(a)redhat.com>
escreveu:
Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time
and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled
again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
distro-sync
This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal
potential problems. You may also run `dnf
upgrade` before running this command.
If you have have rdma-core.i686 installed you have to pass
`--allowerasing`.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919864
If you get this prompt:
...
Total download size: XXX M
Is this ok [y/N]:
you can answer N and nothing happens, no need to test the actual upgrade.
But very likely you get some dependency problem now. In that case, please
report it against the appropriate package. Or
against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in
Fedora 34. Please check existing reports against
fedora-obsolete-packages first:
https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" reports:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=F34FailsToInstall
Thank you
P.S. sent from workstation successfully upgraded to F34 :)
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Associate Manager, Community Packaging Tools, #brno,
#fedora-buildsys
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
12:08 p.m.
yum distro-sync --releasever 34
Last metadata expiration check: 0:10:11 ago on Wed 24 Feb 2021 11:55:46 AM CST.
Error:
Problem: package gnome-tour-40~beta-3.fc34.x86_64 obsoletes
gnome-getting-started-docs < 3.38.1-2 provided by
gnome-getting-started-docs-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
- package gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
requires gnome-getting-started-docs = 3.38.0-2.fc34, but none of the
providers can be installed
- problem with installed package gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64
- problem with installed package
gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-1.fc33.noarch
- gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-1.fc33.noarch does not belong
to a distupgrade repository
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
is what I get here
On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 8:02 AM Geraldo Simião Kutz
<geraldo.simiao.kutz(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I tried here on a F33 kde spin (on bare metal Acer/intel notebook) and it worked
fine, just as expected:
> Instalar 48 Pacotes
> Atualizar 2019 Pacotes
> Remover 5 Pacotes
> Desatualizar 2 Pacotes
> Tamanho total do download: 1.8 G
>
> regards
> Geraldo
>
> FAS: geraldosimiao
>
>
> Em sáb., 20 de fev. de 2021 às 06:49, Miroslav Suchý <msuchy(a)redhat.com>
escreveu:
>>
>> Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and try
to run:
>>
>> # Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
>> # next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
>> sudo dnf module reset '*'
>>
>> sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
>> --enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
>> distro-sync
>>
>> This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal potential
problems. You may also run `dnf
>> upgrade` before running this command.
>>
>> If you have have rdma-core.i686 installed you have to pass `--allowerasing`.
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919864
>>
>>
>> If you get this prompt:
>>
>> ...
>> Total download size: XXX M
>> Is this ok [y/N]:
>>
>> you can answer N and nothing happens, no need to test the actual upgrade.
>>
>> But very likely you get some dependency problem now. In that case, please report
it against the appropriate package. Or
>> against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in Fedora 34.
Please check existing reports against
>> fedora-obsolete-packages first:
>> https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
>> and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" reports:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=F34FailsToInstall
>>
>> Thank you
>>
>> P.S. sent from workstation successfully upgraded to F34 :)
>>
>> --
>> Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
>> Red Hat, Associate Manager, Community Packaging Tools, #brno, #fedora-buildsys
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>> List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
1:06 p.m.
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 12:08:56PM -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
yum distro-sync --releasever 34
Last metadata expiration check: 0:10:11 ago on Wed 24 Feb 2021 11:55:46 AM CST.
Error:
Problem: package gnome-tour-40~beta-3.fc34.x86_64 obsoletes
gnome-getting-started-docs < 3.38.1-2 provided by
gnome-getting-started-docs-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
- package gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
requires gnome-getting-started-docs = 3.38.0-2.fc34, but none of the
providers can be installed
- problem with installed package gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64
- problem with installed package
gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-1.fc33.noarch
- gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-1.fc33.noarch does not belong
to a distupgrade repository
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
This is fixed by gnome-tour-40~beta-4.fc34, which is tagged into f34.
I think there was no compose yesterday, so it hasn't been pushed out.
Zbyszek
2:17 a.m.
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 07:06:47PM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 12:08:56PM -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> yum distro-sync --releasever 34
> Last metadata expiration check: 0:10:11 ago on Wed 24 Feb 2021 11:55:46 AM CST.
> Error:
> Problem: package gnome-tour-40~beta-3.fc34.x86_64 obsoletes
> gnome-getting-started-docs < 3.38.1-2 provided by
> gnome-getting-started-docs-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
> - package gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
> requires gnome-getting-started-docs = 3.38.0-2.fc34, but none of the
> providers can be installed
> - problem with installed package gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64
> - problem with installed package
> gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-1.fc33.noarch
> - gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
> - gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-1.fc33.noarch does not belong
> to a distupgrade repository
> (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
This is fixed by gnome-tour-40~beta-4.fc34, which is tagged into f34.
I think there was no compose yesterday, so it hasn't been pushed out.
I still don't see it today. I don't understand why.
Zbyszek
11:41 a.m.
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 08:17:20AM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 07:06:47PM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 12:08:56PM -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > yum distro-sync --releasever 34
> > Last metadata expiration check: 0:10:11 ago on Wed 24 Feb 2021 11:55:46 AM
CST.
> > Error:
> > Problem: package gnome-tour-40~beta-3.fc34.x86_64 obsoletes
> > gnome-getting-started-docs < 3.38.1-2 provided by
> > gnome-getting-started-docs-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
> > - package gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
> > requires gnome-getting-started-docs = 3.38.0-2.fc34, but none of the
> > providers can be installed
> > - problem with installed package gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64
> > - problem with installed package
> > gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-1.fc33.noarch
> > - gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
> > - gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-1.fc33.noarch does not belong
> > to a distupgrade repository
> > (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
>
> This is fixed by gnome-tour-40~beta-4.fc34, which is tagged into f34.
> I think there was no compose yesterday, so it hasn't been pushed out.
I still don't see it today. I don't understand why.
The next compose failed due to grub2:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933085
we are untagging that and refiring it.
kevin
1:54 a.m.
On 2/20/21 10:49 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34
\
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
distro-sync
Problem: package gnome-tour-40~beta-3.fc34.x86_64 obsoletes
gnome-getting-started-docs < 3.38.1-2 provided by
gnome-getting-started-docs-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
- package gnome-getting-started-docs-fr-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch requires
gnome-getting-started-docs = 3.38.0-2.fc34, but none of the providers
can be installed
- problem with installed package gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64
- problem with installed package
gnome-getting-started-docs-fr-3.38.1-1.fc33.noarch
- gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- gnome-getting-started-docs-fr-3.38.1-1.fc33.noarch does not belong
to a distupgrade repository
Ludovic
--
https://ludovic.hirlimann.net || https://liberapay.com/lhirlimann/
10:16 a.m.
Another dot on the map:
Issues:
- rdma-core (known problem)
- jami (third party repo, does not have f34 yet)
- mpd (requires libupnp.so.16, but there seems to be only libupnp.so.17
in f34 available)
Error:
Problem 1: package jami-daemon-20210219.1.9530a07-1.fc33.x86_64 requires
libupnp.so.16()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- libupnp-1.12.1-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package jami-daemon-20210219.1.9530a07-1.fc33.x86_64
Problem 2: rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686 has inferior architecture
- rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686
Problem 3: cannot install both libupnp-1.14.1-1.fc34.x86_64 and
libupnp-1.12.1-2.fc33.x86_64
- package vlc-core-1:3.0.12.1-6.fc34.x86_64 requires libupnp.so.17()(64bit), but none of
the providers can be installed
- package jami-daemon-20210219.1.9530a07-1.fc33.x86_64 requires libupnp.so.16()(64bit),
but none of the providers can be installed
- problem with installed package vlc-core-1:3.0.12-1.fc33.x86_64
- package jami-20210219.1.9530a07-1.fc33.x86_64 requires jami-daemon =
20210219.1.9530a07, but none of the providers can be installed
- vlc-core-1:3.0.12-1.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package jami-20210219.1.9530a07-1.fc33.x86_64
Problem 4: package vlc-core-1:3.0.12.1-6.fc34.x86_64 requires libupnp.so.17()(64bit), but
none of the providers can be installed
- cannot install both libupnp-1.14.1-1.fc34.x86_64 and libupnp-1.12.1-2.fc33.x86_64
- package vlc-1:3.0.12.1-6.fc34.x86_64 requires libvlccore.so.9()(64bit), but none of
the providers can be installed
- package mpd-1:0.22.4-2.fc34.x86_64 requires libupnp.so.16()(64bit), but none of the
providers can be installed
- problem with installed package vlc-1:3.0.12-1.fc33.x86_64
- problem with installed package mpd-1:0.22.6-1.fc33.x86_64
- package vlc-core-1:3.0.12-1.fc33.x86_64 requires libdav1d.so.4()(64bit), but none of
the providers can be installed
- vlc-1:3.0.12-1.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- mpd-1:0.22.6-1.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- libdav1d-0.7.1-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
All the best,
Astra
1:12 p.m.
Hi,
On Sat, 2021-02-20 at 10:49 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be
enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34
\
--enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-
modular \
distro-sync
This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will
reveal potential problems. You may also run `dnf
upgrade` before running this command.
I think we should do this exact same test but after Fedora release ,
For example on Dec 6 2020, I upgrade from F31 to F32 and I had these
results [1] I did a dnf distro-sync , but we found some mistakes if we
verify why package have lower versions in Fedora n+1 , sometimes
maintainer didn't send package to bodhi, other times package it is in
updates-testing forever and many other issues.
Best regards,
[1]
libappindicator-0:12.10.0-29.fc31.i686
libappindicator-0:12.10.0-29.fc31.x86_64
libappindicator-gtk3-0:12.10.0-29.fc31.i686
libappindicator-gtk3-0:12.10.0-29.fc31.x86_64
microcode_ctl-2:2.1-39.3.fc31.x86_64
perl-Net-DNS-SEC-0:1.17-1.fc31.x86_64
perl-Type-Tiny-0:1.010006-1.fc31.noarch
python2-pillow-0:6.2.2-3.fc31.x86_64
python2-setuptools-0:41.6.0-1.fc31.noarch
slirp4netns-0:1.1.6-1.fc31.x86_64
tpm2-abrmd-selinux-0:2.3.1-2.fc31.noarch
xawtv-0:3.107-2.fc31.x86_64
Downgrading:
baobab x86_64 3.34.0-2.fc32k
libappindicator x86_64 12.10.0-28.fc32
libappindicator-gtk3 x86_64 12.10.0-28.fc32
microcode_ctl x86_64 2:2.1-39.fc32
perl-Net-DNS-SEC x86_64 1.12-4.fc32
perl-Type-Tiny noarch 1.010004-1.fc32
python2-pillow x86_64 6.2.2-2.fc326 k
python2-setuptools noarch 41.2.0-2.fc32
slirp4netns x86_64 1.1.4-1.fc32
tpm2-abrmd-selinux noarch 2.3.1-1.fc32
xawtv x86_64 107-1.fc32
If you have have rdma-core.i686 installed you have to pass `
--allowerasing`.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919864
If you get this prompt:
...
Total download size: XXX M
Is this ok [y/N]:
you can answer N and nothing happens, no need to test the actual
upgrade.
But very likely you get some dependency problem now. In that case,
please report it against the appropriate package. Or
against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in
Fedora 34. Please check existing reports against
fedora-obsolete-packages first:
https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" reports:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=F34FailsToInstall
Thank you
P.S. sent from workstation successfully upgraded to F34 :)
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Associate Manager, Community Packaging Tools, #brno,
#fedora-buildsys
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
--
Sérgio M. B.
1108
days inactive
1154
days old
40 comments
25 participants
participants (25)
-
Adrian Reber -
Ankur Sinha -
Anthony F McInerney -
Artem Tim -
Artur Frenszek-Iwicki -
Carlos "casep" Sepulveda -
chedi toueiti -
David Kaufmann -
Dennis Gilmore -
Fabio Valentini -
Geraldo Simião Kutz -
Héctor H. Louzao P. -
José Abílio Matos -
Kevin Fenzi -
Ludovic Hirlimann -
Marián Konček -
Micah Shennum -
Miro Hrončok -
Miroslav Suchý -
Nathanael D. Noblet -
Pablo Sebastián Greco -
Solomon Peachy -
Sven Kieske -
Sérgio Basto -
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek