I have several machines I've recently upgraded from F23 to F24 using DNF. Daily upgrades of F24 packages on most of them are proceeding as expected. But this morning I found one that did a very peculiar "upgrade". Details below.
# cat /etc/fedora-release Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) # rpm -q fedora-release fedora-release-24-2.noarch # uname -a Linux <machine> 4.6.6-300.fc24.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Aug 10 21:07:35 UTC 2016 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux # cat /var/log/dnf.rpm.log ... Sep 07 23:31:25 INFO Upgraded: goffice-0.10.32-1.fc23.x86_64 Sep 07 23:31:28 INFO Upgraded: gnumeric-1:1.12.32-1.fc23.x86_64 Sep 07 23:31:28 INFO Upgraded: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-ECDSA-0.08-1.fc23.x86_64 Sep 07 23:31:29 INFO Upgraded: duplicity-0.7.10-1.fc23.x86_64 Sep 07 23:31:29 INFO Cleanup: gnumeric-1:1.12.31-1.fc24.x86_64 Sep 07 23:31:29 INFO Cleanup: goffice-0.10.30-1.fc24.x86_64 Sep 07 23:31:29 INFO Cleanup: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-ECDSA-0.07-4.fc24.x86_64 Sep 07 23:31:29 INFO Cleanup: duplicity-0.7.09-1.fc24.x86_64 ...
So, it appears that, having been asked to do a routine upgrade, DNF chose to /downgrade/ these four packages to their F23 versions. Why? Is it just because the F23 versions are numerically greater than the F24 versions? But how is DNF even finding the F23 packages in the F24 repos?
You are right that F23 package was picked because availability and higher version. The tag 1.fc23 represent only release. DNF do not exclude packages according to fedora tag in release tag.
Probably it would be nice to investigate the original repo from f23 packages where upgraded. Look if f23 packages are still available in repositories.
The problem can be in: 1. hard written releasever in url in repo file on your system. 2. Broken mirror - in 24 directory there is repo for fc23
Have a nice day
Jaroslav
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 7:26 PM, CLOSE Dave Dave.Close@us.thalesgroup.com wrote:
I have several machines I've recently upgraded from F23 to F24 using DNF. Daily upgrades of F24 packages on most of them are proceeding as expected. But this morning I found one that did a very peculiar "upgrade". Details below.
# cat /etc/fedora-release Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) # rpm -q fedora-release fedora-release-24-2.noarch # uname -a Linux <machine> 4.6.6-300.fc24.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Aug 10 21:07:35 UTC 2016 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux # cat /var/log/dnf.rpm.log ... Sep 07 23:31:25 INFO Upgraded: goffice-0.10.32-1.fc23.x86_64 Sep 07 23:31:28 INFO Upgraded: gnumeric-1:1.12.32-1.fc23.x86_64 Sep 07 23:31:28 INFO Upgraded: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-ECDSA-0.08-1.fc23.x86_64 Sep 07 23:31:29 INFO Upgraded: duplicity-0.7.10-1.fc23.x86_64 Sep 07 23:31:29 INFO Cleanup: gnumeric-1:1.12.31-1.fc24.x86_64 Sep 07 23:31:29 INFO Cleanup: goffice-0.10.30-1.fc24.x86_64 Sep 07 23:31:29 INFO Cleanup: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-ECDSA-0.07-4.fc24.x86_64 Sep 07 23:31:29 INFO Cleanup: duplicity-0.7.09-1.fc24.x86_64 ...
So, it appears that, having been asked to do a routine upgrade, DNF chose to /downgrade/ these four packages to their F23 versions. Why? Is it just because the F23 versions are numerically greater than the F24 versions? But how is DNF even finding the F23 packages in the F24 repos? -- Dave Close -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
-
CLOSE Dave -
Jaroslav Mracek