Can anyone explain this output?
I.e. why is dnf complaining about broken dependencies in libreoffice-gtk2 and libreoffice-x11 when neither package is installed or required by any of the updates being installed?
On 11/25/2016 08:42 AM, Ian Pilcher wrote:
Can anyone explain this output?
I.e. why is dnf complaining about broken dependencies in libreoffice-gtk2 and libreoffice-x11 when neither package is installed or required by any of the updates being installed?
I don't have F25 installed anywhere yet, but from something I've seen mentioned on one of the lists, dnf currently prints that message for weak dependencies. And libreoffice-x11 is a weak dependency of libreoffice-core. So this is not a problem and will be corrected soon.
On 11/25/2016 03:43 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
I don't have F25 installed anywhere yet, but from something I've seen mentioned on one of the lists, dnf currently prints that message for weak dependencies. And libreoffice-x11 is a weak dependency of libreoffice-core. So this is not a problem and will be corrected soon.
That does sound like a plausible cause. The weird thing is that I already have install_weak_deps=false in dnf.conf, and it doesn't look like there's any separate setting for updates.
So it *shouldn't* be trying to install weak dependencies.
Hi
On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 11:29 AM Ian Pilcher arequipeno@gmail.com wrote:
That does sound like a plausible cause. The weird thing is that I already have install_weak_deps=false in dnf.conf, and it doesn't look like there's any separate setting for updates.
So it *shouldn't* be trying to install weak dependencies.
Might be worth getting the debugging info and reporting a bug
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf/wiki/Bug-Reporting
Rahul
On 11/27/2016 08:40 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Might be worth getting the debugging info and reporting a bug
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf/wiki/Bug-Reporting
Or not:
Note: these bugs will have default priority set to low as it's in 95% not a DNF bug and wastes only time of DNF developers.
On 11/28/2016 10:41 AM, Ian Pilcher wrote:
On 11/27/2016 08:40 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Might be worth getting the debugging info and reporting a bug
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf/wiki/Bug-Reporting
Or not:
Note: these bugs will have default priority set to low as it's in 95% not a DNF bug and wastes only time of DNF developers.
Why do you think that? This is definitely a dnf bug. But in this case, there's no need to report it as it has already been fixed in a future version.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/...
" afaik these are weak dependencies, that are not installed (by policy), dnf 2.0 reports them without the confusing "conflicts" "
On 11/27/2016 08:28 AM, Ian Pilcher wrote:
On 11/25/2016 03:43 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
I don't have F25 installed anywhere yet, but from something I've seen mentioned on one of the lists, dnf currently prints that message for weak dependencies. And libreoffice-x11 is a weak dependency of libreoffice-core. So this is not a problem and will be corrected soon.
That does sound like a plausible cause. The weird thing is that I already have install_weak_deps=false in dnf.conf, and it doesn't look like there's any separate setting for updates.
So it *shouldn't* be trying to install weak dependencies.
It's not trying to install them, I think it's just a confusing message that they are there. This has been fixed in dnf 2.0.