The PC I'm on at the moment, my #2, claims to be running F18 :
[btth@Hbsk2 ~]$ uname -r 3.6.10-4.fc18.i686 [btth@Hbsk2 ~]$
The last two times I've run yum update on it, it has gotten all *F17* updates. Yesterday :
Updated: evolution-data-server.i686 0:3.4.4-5.fc17 java-1.7.0-openjdk.i686 1:1.7.0.19-2.3.9.4.fc17 nss.i686 0:3.14.3-2.fc17 nss-sysinit.i686 0:3.14.3-2.fc17 nss-tools.i686 0:3.14.3-2.fc17 orc.i686 0:0.4.17-2.fc17 policycoreutils.i686 0:2.1.13-27.3.fc17 policycoreutils-python.i686 0:2.1.13-27.3.fc17 policycoreutils-restorecond.i686 0:2.1.13-27.3.fc17 policycoreutils-sandbox.i686 0:2.1.13-27.3.fc17 python-urlgrabber.noarch 0:3.9.1-18.fc17 ruby.i686 0:1.9.3.429-30.fc17 ruby-irb.noarch 0:1.9.3.429-30.fc17 ruby-libs.i686 0:1.9.3.429-30.fc17 rubygem-bigdecimal.i686 0:1.1.0-30.fc17 rubygem-io-console.i686 0:0.3-30.fc17 xfce4-screenshooter.i686 0:1.8.1-1.fc17 xfce4-screenshooter-plugin.i686 0:1.8.1-1.fc17 xscreensaver.i686 1:5.21-6.fc17 xscreensaver-base.i686 1:5.21-6.fc17 xscreensaver-extras.i686 1:5.21-6.fc17 xscreensaver-extras-base.i686 1:5.21-6.fc17 xscreensaver-extras-gss.i686 1:5.21-6.fc17 xscreensaver-gl-base.i686 1:5.21-6.fc17 xscreensaver-gl-extras.i686 1:5.21-6.fc17 xscreensaver-gl-extras-gss.i686 1:5.21-6.fc17 xulrunner.i686 0:21.0-4.fc17
Complete!
And just now :
Dependencies Resolved
================================================================================ Package Arch Version Repository Size ================================================================================ Updating: amarok i686 2.7.1-2.fc17 updates 4.9 M amarok-doc noarch 2.7.1-2.fc17 updates 30 M amarok-libs i686 2.7.1-2.fc17 updates 3.1 M amarok-utils i686 2.7.1-2.fc17 updates 126 k glibc i686 2.15-59.fc17 updates 4.1 M glibc-common i686 2.15-59.fc17 updates 11 M xorg-x11-drv-openchrome i686 0.3.3-1.fc17 updates 161 k
Transaction Summary ================================================================================ Upgrade 7 Packages
Total download size: 53 M Is this ok [y/N]: ==========================================================================
Is this normal?? Have I screwed up royally somehow? I went through the directions at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading (or so I thought). However, rpm -q yum says :
[btth@Hbsk2 ~]$ rpm -q yum yum-3.4.3-31.fc17.noarch [btth@Hbsk2 ~]$
Nevertheless, I get
[root@Hbsk2 ~]# yum update yum Loaded plugins: langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit No Packages marked for Update [root@Hbsk2 ~]#
*Note* : my #3 PC, which has been running F18 for a couple days longer, does get F18 updates, and does reply to rpm -q yum with F18.
On 6/2/2013 2:57 PM, Beartooth wrote:
The PC I'm on at the moment, my #2, claims to be running F18 :
[btth@Hbsk2 ~]$ uname -r 3.6.10-4.fc18.i686 [btth@Hbsk2 ~]$
The last two times I've run yum update on it, it has gotten all *F17* updates. Yesterday :
<snip>
The 'what version number' command is"
cat /etc/fedora-release
Beartooth wrote:
The PC I'm on at the moment, my #2, claims to be running F18 :
[btth@Hbsk2 ~]$ uname -r 3.6.10-4.fc18.i686 [btth@Hbsk2 ~]$
The last two times I've run yum update on it, it has gotten all *F17* updates. Yesterday :
Looks like you've somehow installed a f18 kernel on a genuine f17 box.
-- rex
On Sun, 02 Jun 2013 22:17:18 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
Looks like you've somehow installed a f18 kernel on a genuine f17 box.
That could be :
[btth@Hbsk2 ~]$ cat /etc/fedora-release Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle)
So I played around with rpm and yum doing the things usually suggested when plain "yum update" fails, till I got a plain one that completed normally; re-did the download from updates-testing; redid fedup- cli; got a notice to reboot and did; then tried yum update --skip-broken. I think there had also been a yum-complete-transaction in among there.
Yum update --skip-broken got me a disiplay of lines rushing up the screen too fast to read, which literally went on for several minutes. It ended up with :
Transaction Summary ================================================================================================ Install 3 Packages (+7 Dependent packages) Upgrade 71 Packages Remove 2 Packages Skipped (dependency problems) 2688 Packages
Total download size: 293 M Is this ok [y/N]:
I assented, noting that most but not all of the lines above contained an fc18 term. This time I got :
Is this ok [y/N]: y Downloading Packages: Setting up and reading Presto delta metadata warning: rpmts_HdrFromFdno: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID de7f38bd: NOKEY Public key for GMT-coastlines-2.2.2-1.fc18.noarch.rpm is not installed (1/6): nfs-utils-lib-1.1.5-6.fc17.i686.rpm | 61 kB 00:00:02 (2/6): freetype-freeworld-2.4.8-4.fc17.i686.rpm | 351 kB 00:00:03 (3/6): module-init-tools-3.16-5.fc17.i686.rpm | 426 kB 00:00:03 (4/6): qrencode-3.2.0-3.fc17.i686.rpm | 53 kB 00:00:00 (5/6): atlas-sse2-3.8.4-3.fc17.i686.rpm | 2.5 MB 00:00:05 (6/6): lapack-3.4.2-2.fc17.i686.rpm | 5.2 MB 00:00:06 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total 14 MB/s | 293 MB 00:20
Public key for iwl4965-firmware-228.61.2.24-23.fc18.noarch.rpm is not installed [root@Hbsk2 ~]#
Cryptography key trouble, of all things! If the display ever paused to ask whether to let it install a key, it did it so briefly I never even suspected.
On a pure hunch, I tried "yum clean all" and "yum update" again. That got me the eruptions of busy-ness again, ending with :
--> Processing Dependency: xserver-abi(xinput-16) >= 0 for package: xorg- x11-drv-synaptics-1.6.3-4.fc17.i686 --> Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Package: privoxy-3.0.21-3.fc17.i686 (updates) Requires: libpcre.so.0 Removing: pcre-8.21-7.fc17.i686 (@updates) libpcre.so.0 Updated By: pcre-8.31-5.fc18.i686 (_local) Not found Available: pcre-8.21-3.fc17.i686 (fedora) libpcre.so.0 Error: Package: xorg-x11-drv-synaptics-1.6.3-4.fc17.i686 (@updates) Requires: xserver-abi(xinput-16) >= 0 Removing: xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.12.4-2.fc17.i686 (@updates) xserver-abi(xinput-16) = 0 Updated By: xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.13.3-3.fc18.i686 (_local) Not found Available: xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.12.0-2.fc17.i686 (fedora) xserver-abi(xinput-16) = 0 You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest [root@Hbsk2 ~]#
I suppose this is progress, maybe, maybe. At least it's not the crypto trouble recrudescing. I'll do the yum and rpm attempts yet another time, and report.
Am 05.06.2013 20:08, schrieb Beartooth:
On Sun, 02 Jun 2013 22:17:18 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
Looks like you've somehow installed a f18 kernel on a genuine f17 box.
That could be :
[btth@Hbsk2 ~]$ cat /etc/fedora-release Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle)
this is clearly a F17 and most likely someone enabled the rawhide repo to clutter the setup
Yum update --skip-broken got me a disiplay of lines rushing up the screen too fast to read, which literally went on for several minutes. It ended up with :
Transaction Summary
Install 3 Packages (+7 Dependent packages) Upgrade 71 Packages Remove 2 Packages Skipped (dependency problems) 2688 Packages
Total download size: 293 M Is this ok [y/N]:
I assented, noting that most but not all of the lines above contained an fc18 term. This time I got :
Is this ok [y/N]: y
*wow* do *not* skip-broken in case of *dist-upgrades*
this is the way to go in doubt and *not* "yum update" http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading_Fedora_using_yum#Fedora_17_-.3E_Fedo...
On Wed, 05 Jun 2013 18:08:08 +0000, Beartooth wrote:
On Sun, 02 Jun 2013 22:17:18 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
Looks like you've somehow installed a f18 kernel on a genuine f17 box.
That could be :
[btth@Hbsk2 ~]$ cat /etc/fedora-release Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle)
So I played around with rpm and yum doing the things usually suggested when plain "yum update" fails, till I got a plain one that completed normally; re-did the download from updates-testing; redid fedup- cli; got a notice to reboot and did; then tried yum update --skip-broken. I think there had also been a yum-complete-transaction in among there.
Yum update --skip-broken got me a disiplay of lines rushing up the screen too fast to read, which literally went on for several minutes. It ended up with :
Transaction Summary
================================================================================================
Install 3 Packages (+7 Dependent packages) Upgrade 71 Packages Remove 2 Packages Skipped (dependency problems) 2688 Packages
Total download size: 293 M Is this ok [y/N]:
I assented, noting that most but not all of the lines above contained an fc18 term. This time I got :
Is this ok [y/N]: y Downloading Packages: Setting up and reading Presto delta metadata warning: rpmts_HdrFromFdno: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID de7f38bd: NOKEY Public key for GMT-coastlines-2.2.2-1.fc18.noarch.rpm is not installed (1/6): nfs-utils-lib-1.1.5-6.fc17.i686.rpm | 61 kB 00:00:02 (2/6): freetype-freeworld-2.4.8-4.fc17.i686.rpm | 351 kB 00:00:03 (3/6): module-init-tools-3.16-5.fc17.i686.rpm | 426 kB 00:00:03 (4/6): qrencode-3.2.0-3.fc17.i686.rpm | 53 kB 00:00:00 (5/6): atlas-sse2-3.8.4-3.fc17.i686.rpm | 2.5 MB 00:00:05 (6/6): lapack-3.4.2-2.fc17.i686.rpm | 5.2 MB 00:00:06
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 14 MB/s | 293 MB 00:20
Public key for iwl4965-firmware-228.61.2.24-23.fc18.noarch.rpm is not installed [root@Hbsk2 ~]#
Cryptography key trouble, of all things! If the display ever paused to ask whether to let it install a key, it did it so briefly I never even suspected.
On a pure hunch, I tried "yum clean all" and "yum update" again. That got me the eruptions of busy-ness again, ending with :
--> Processing Dependency: xserver-abi(xinput-16) >= 0 for package: xorg- x11-drv-synaptics-1.6.3-4.fc17.i686 --> Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Package: privoxy-3.0.21-3.fc17.i686 (updates) Requires: libpcre.so.0 Removing: pcre-8.21-7.fc17.i686 (@updates) libpcre.so.0 Updated By: pcre-8.31-5.fc18.i686 (_local) Not found Available: pcre-8.21-3.fc17.i686 (fedora) libpcre.so.0 Error: Package: xorg-x11-drv-synaptics-1.6.3-4.fc17.i686 (@updates) Requires: xserver-abi(xinput-16) >= 0 Removing: xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.12.4-2.fc17.i686 (@updates) xserver-abi(xinput-16) = 0 Updated By: xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.13.3-3.fc18.i686 (_local) Not found Available: xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.12.0-2.fc17.i686 (fedora) xserver-abi(xinput-16) = 0 You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest [root@Hbsk2 ~]#
I suppose this is progress, maybe, maybe. At least it's not the crypto trouble recrudescing. I'll do the yum and rpm attempts yet another time, and report.
Somewhat later : I did "yum remove privoxy" and it did, without taking anything else; so I did "yum remove xorg-x11-drv-synaptics" and again it took only the one item. This reminded me of that old-time dependency hell; so I took a deep breath and did "yum update" yet again.
It soon reached :
Transaction Summary ================================================================================================ Install 32 Packages (+444 Dependent packages) Upgrade 2113 Packages (+ 2 Dependent packages) Remove 2 Packages
Total download size: 2.1 G Is this ok [y/N]:
Again I assented. Almost immediately it wanted a public key for Acetone! And sat there while I typed the above, then said :
Is this ok [y/N]: y Downloading Packages: Setting up and reading Presto delta metadata warning: rpmts_HdrFromFdno: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID de7f38bd: NOKEY Public key for AcetoneISO2-2.3-4.fc18.i686.rpm is not installed libwps-0.2.9-1.fc17.i686.rpm | 242 kB 00:00:01 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total 20 MB/s | 2.1 GB 01:47
Public key for os-prober-1.58-1.fc18.i686.rpm is not installed [root@Hbsk2 ~]#
On a hunch, I tried yum update os-prober; that looped back and choked again on its key. So I'm trying yum update --exclude=os-prober.
Lish me wuck, wots of wuck; and I help all this helps somebody somehow.
On Sun, 02 Jun 2013 18:57:42 +0000, Beartooth wrote:
The PC I'm on at the moment, my #2, claims to be running F18 :
[snipperoo]
Is this normal?? Have I screwed up royally somehow? I went through the directions at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading (or so I thought). However, rpm -q yum says :
[btth@Hbsk2 ~]$ rpm -q yum yum-3.4.3-31.fc17.noarch [btth@Hbsk2 ~]$
[snipperee]
*Note* : my #3 PC, which has been running F18 for a couple days longer, does get F18 updates, and does reply to rpm -q yum with F18.
Please Note that I am *not* repeat *not* trying to use yum to upgrade. I'm trying to comply with the requirement that F17 be fully updated before I upgrade.
On Sun, 02 Jun 2013 18:57:42 +0000, Beartooth wrote: [....]
Is this normal?? Have I screwed up royally somehow? I went through the directions at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading (or so I thought). However, rpm -q yum says :
[btth@Hbsk2 ~]$ rpm -q yum yum-3.4.3-31.fc17.noarch [btth@Hbsk2 ~]$
*Note 1* : my #3 PC, which has been running F18 for a couple days longer, does get F18 updates, and does reply to rpm -q yum with F18.
*Note 2* Please bear in mind that I am *not* trying to upgrade these F17 PCs to F18 *with yum*. If I can, I'd like to get them clean enough to upgrade with Fedup; after all, that did succeed on my first try (with PC #3). But if I can get my favorite files into a safe harbor, I'm resigned to do fresh installs somehow.
It has now been a week, or nearly; and at this point I have news both good and bad. The bad, if you call it news, is that my #1 PC (which I have not mentioned in this thread before) has been having similar troubles. The good is that I have managed, I don't know how, to regain access of sorts to both #1 AND #2. *And* I have an external USB hard drive with space enough to hold what I want to salvage.
The #2 PC is running on a live DVD, and I can't seem to get it to access the files on the hard drive, so that I can copy them to the external one.
The #1 PC managed to boot into FC17, or so it says; I put a live medium into it, but it took long enough at a Grub prompt to let me pick an entry other than the default. (I don't know whether that medium is still doing anything or not.)
So in theory, iiuc, I should be able to copy /home from each of the problem PCs onto the external drive, do a fresh install on each, and copy its old files back onto it afterward. Does anyone have a favorite how-to-do-it page, comprehensible to a subtechnoid, that will guide me through? My sticking point, oddly enough perhaps, seems to be copying the files off the PCs, especially off #2.
On 06/08/2013 12:21 PM, Beartooth wrote:
So in theory, iiuc, I should be able to copy /home from each of the problem PCs onto the external drive, do a fresh install on each, and copy its old files back onto it afterward. Does anyone have a favorite how-to-do-it page, comprehensible to a subtechnoid, that will guide me through? My sticking point, oddly enough perhaps, seems to be copying the files off the PCs, especially off #2.
Two things: first, when you do your fresh install, put /home onto its own partition. That way, there's less chance that you'll need that backup after your next upgrade or clean install. (Please note that even though I do that, I never upgrade or install without a backup, Just In Case.) Second, and less important, I know and understand quite a few acronyms, abbreviations and initialisms, but I can't place "iiuc." Were you intending to type "aiui?"
On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 12:37:50 -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
Two things: first, when you do your fresh install, put /home onto its own partition. That way, there's less chance that you'll need that backup after your next upgrade or clean install. (Please note that even though I do that, I never upgrade or install without a backup, Just In Case.)
Standard advice, doubtless as good as it is standard; but I've yet to understand how to do it, alas!
Second, and less important, I know and understand quite a few acronyms, abbreviations and initialisms, but I can't place "iiuc." Were you intending to type "aiui?"
I meant it as a take-off on iirc : if I understand correctly.
Am 08.06.2013 22:03, schrieb Beartooth:
On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 12:37:50 -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
Two things: first, when you do your fresh install, put /home onto its own partition. That way, there's less chance that you'll need that backup after your next upgrade or clean install. (Please note that even though I do that, I never upgrade or install without a backup, Just In Case.)
Standard advice, doubtless as good as it is standard; but I've yet to understand how to do it, alas!
man fstab
* simply create a prtition * mount it at /home * you are done
if a existing /home is there, well, mount the new partition to whatever, move all contents of /home after logout from the graphical desktop there
unount the temporary mount of the new partition an dmount it to the now empty /home, this is really easy to do
On 06/08/2013 01:03 PM, Beartooth wrote:
Standard advice, doubtless as good as it is standard; but I've yet to understand how to do it, alas!
I've not tried installing F 18, and I've heard odd things about customizing your partition layout in the newest version of anaconda, but it's never been at all hard in the past. In general, you specify that you're going to create a custom partitioning layout. One of the partitions is mounted at /home. If you're installing Fedora for the first time, you have it formatted; if you're doing a clean install over an old one, you simply select the same partition that you used for /home last time and tell the installer not to format it. Then, when you create your username during firstboot, you use the same one as you did before and tell the program to use the same folder and to leave the contents intact. If all goes as expected, you have all of your old files, your old configuration, your old desktop settings ready to go. If not, there's always the backup.
Also, thanx for expanding the abbreviation; I'd not thought of that one.
Allegedly, on or about 08 June 2013, Joe Zeff sent:
Then, when you create your username during firstboot, you use the same one as you did before and tell the program to use the same folder and to leave the contents intact.
If you have more than one user, then either make sure that the newly recreated users have the same UID and GID, or chown recursively their homespaces to their new IDs.
Whenever I set up a system, I set up one or two test users when I set up my own account. It makes fault finding, and restoring a stuffed account, an awful lot easier when you have a spare account ready and waiting.
-
Beartooth -
David -
Joe Zeff -
Reindl Harald -
Rex Dieter -
Tim