As I reported this morning, `yum --releasever=18 distro-sync' told me when I got to it "killed." Just that (on a line by itself). No hint of when, why, how, nor anything else. Can I get to start back up from where it left off, instead of from the beginning?
The man page is not just hard to read (as usual) but downright confusing. Should I try 'yum redo' or 'yum history redo'? Or maybe yum- complete-transaction??
Beartooth wrote:
As I reported this morning, `yum --releasever=18 distro-sync' told me when I got to it "killed." Just that (on a line by itself). No hint of when, why, how, nor anything else. Can I get to start back up from where it left off, instead of from the beginning?
That's generally what this does: yum-complete-transaction
-- Rex
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 13:31:50 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
Beartooth wrote:
As I reported this morning, `yum --releasever=18 distro-sync' told me when I got to it "killed." Just that (on a line by itself). No hint of when, why, how, nor anything else. Can I get to start back up from where it left off, instead of from the beginning?
That's generally what this does: yum-complete-transaction
So I suspected; thanks for the reassurance!
When I tried it, it told me it had nothing unfinished. :-{ So I hit it one more time with the distro-sync, adding --skip-broken for good measure. This time it also took off like a scalded cat, but presently came to a stop, apparently in medias res, and after a little while started up again, until another stop. All the stops have been different, but all come while "processing dependency." So I'm keeping all the fingers I can crossed. Stay tuned.
On 10/22/2013 3:06 PM, Beartooth wrote:
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 13:31:50 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
Beartooth wrote:
As I reported this morning, `yum --releasever=18 distro-sync' told me when I got to it "killed." Just that (on a line by itself). No hint of when, why, how, nor anything else. Can I get to start back up from where it left off, instead of from the beginning?
That's generally what this does: yum-complete-transaction
So I suspected; thanks for the reassurance!
When I tried it, it told me it had nothing unfinished. :-{ So I hit it one more time with the distro-sync, adding --skip-broken for good measure. This time it also took off like a scalded cat, but presently came to a stop, apparently in medias res, and after a little while started up again, until another stop. All the stops have been different, but all come while "processing dependency." So I'm keeping all the fingers I can crossed. Stay tuned.
Excuse me. A question or two?
You messed up an upgrade over a week ago, maybe two(?), and you still have no solution.
How would this time spend 'broken' compare with the time it would have taken to copy your important files, format the drive, and install the never release. Then put back your files and do the tweaks?
:-)
On 10/22/2013 12:51 PM, David wrote:
How would this time spend 'broken' compare with the time it would have taken to copy your important files, format the drive, and install the never release. Then put back your files and do the tweaks?
I consider cleaning up a munged upgrade a learning experience. Of course, I'm retired and have the time to spend.
On 10/22/2013 3:58 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 10/22/2013 12:51 PM, David wrote:
How would this time spend 'broken' compare with the time it would have taken to copy your important files, format the drive, and install the never release. Then put back your files and do the tweaks?
I consider cleaning up a munged upgrade a learning experience. Of course, I'm retired and have the time to spend.
Retired and on the couch does not equate with 'need my machine'. *If you* have enough time to play games for days, or weeks, help yourself.
Me? I take the 'short path' and solve the problem. Your choice.
It's a business thing.
On 10/22/2013 10:21 PM, David wrote:
Retired and on the couch does not equate with 'need my machine'. *If you* have enough time to play games for days, or weeks, help yourself.
It also helps, of course, that I also have a laptop running Fedora and I always upgrade it first. My desktop only gets upgraded after I'm sure that the laptop's working properly.
Me? I take the 'short path' and solve the problem. Your choice.
Naturally. I wouldn't even consider trying that on a production machine, or even a workstation in a Linux shop. That's why I made a point of stating that I'm retired and have the time, so that nobody would think I was suggesting that trying to recover from a failed upgrade is the right move for anybody else.
I agree with Joe. Some of the best learning opportunities come with the system is fubar :) For as long as you have another one that is working and the one system down is not critical, it is real fun finding out if you can actually resurrect it. Some of the best lessons I have learned have been with systems like that, and they have come handy in my professional life.
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Joe Zeff joe@zeff.us wrote:
On 10/22/2013 10:21 PM, David wrote:
Retired and on the couch does not equate with 'need my machine'. *If you* have enough time to play games for days, or weeks, help yourself.
It also helps, of course, that I also have a laptop running Fedora and I always upgrade it first. My desktop only gets upgraded after I'm sure that the laptop's working properly.
Me? I take the 'short path' and solve the problem. Your choice.
Naturally. I wouldn't even consider trying that on a production machine, or even a workstation in a Linux shop. That's why I made a point of stating that I'm retired and have the time, so that nobody would think I was suggesting that trying to recover from a failed upgrade is the right move for anybody else.
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.**org/mailman/listinfo/usershttps://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-**of-conducthttp://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/**Mailing_list_guidelineshttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
On 10/23/2013 2:54 AM, Javier Perez wrote:
I agree with Joe. Some of the best learning opportunities come with the system is fubar :) For as long as you have another one that is working and the one system down is not critical, it is real fun finding out if you can actually resurrect it. Some of the best lessons I have learned have been with systems like that, and they have come handy in my professional life.
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Joe Zeff <joe@zeff.us mailto:joe@zeff.us> wrote:
On 10/22/2013 10:21 PM, David wrote: Retired and on the couch does not equate with 'need my machine'. *If you* have enough time to play games for days, or weeks, help yourself. It also helps, of course, that I also have a laptop running Fedora and I always upgrade it first. My desktop only gets upgraded after I'm sure that the laptop's working properly. Me? I take the 'short path' and solve the problem. Your choice. Naturally. I wouldn't even consider trying that on a production machine, or even a workstation in a Linux shop. That's why I made a point of stating that I'm retired and have the time, so that nobody would think I was suggesting that trying to recover from a failed upgrade is the right move for anybody else.
As I said to Joe... Some users are that. Users. Not everyone wants to be the repairman. Or the student.
On 10/23/2013 08:44 AM, David wrote:
As I said to Joe... Some users are that. Users. Not everyone wants to be the repairman. Or the student.
And, to repeat myself, I never said that J. Random User should do what I did.
Now, I have a question: what made you think that I thought that regular users should have to spend the time to recover from a bad upgrade instead of reinstalling?
On 10/23/2013 3:22 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 10/23/2013 08:44 AM, David wrote:
As I said to Joe... Some users are that. Users. Not everyone wants to be the repairman. Or the student.
And, to repeat myself, I never said that J. Random User should do what I did.
Now, I have a question: what made you think that I thought that regular users should have to spend the time to recover from a bad upgrade instead of reinstalling?
You are in this thread where almost everyone is telling this older gentleman all of these cryptic, CLI, commands. Blasting him with 'this command' and 'that command' that he has already said that he has a problems with understanding and typing. It's normally called "solving a problem with a shotgun".
Not saying that you did ... but I have always had a problem with advice that starts out with "try this" and ends with "it might work". :-)
And as *I* said it takes me 15-20 minutes to download the DVD and maybe 20-30 minutes to format and install it. And yes it does take some time to reconfigure 'things' to get everything back.
The OP said 'since Sept 23. That is 28-29 days. What do you think? minutes? Or days?
On 10/23/2013 06:10 PM, David wrote:
Not saying that you did ... but I have always had a problem with advice that starts out with "try this" and ends with "it might work". :-)
When it comes to fixing upgrades that don't work, the first piece of advice should be to make sure that you have a recent backup, and if you don't, do what you can to preserve as much of your data as possible. (If you can't, that too is a learning experience, but one we'd rather you don't go through.) And, the whole idea of "it might work" suggestions is that if they do work, it's faster than a reinstall and if it doesn't, all you've lost is time. And of course, if this is a production machine and time is the one thing you don't have, a clean install may well be your only choice.
One of the problems with this type of support is that those of us offering help only have a limited knowledge of your situation and in many cases, it's hard to narrow things down enough to be sure that what you tell somebody to do is the right thing. Thus, you sometimes have to tell them how to recover, provided that you've guessed right about what happened, and hope that your guess wasn't too far off. That's why I'll sometimes ask questions about odd possibilities: I'm trying to narrow down the choices. (As an example, I'll often ask questions about hardware because it can save lots of time if that turns out to be the issue, and doesn't really waste any if it isn't.)
On 10/23/2013 9:49 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 10/23/2013 06:10 PM, David wrote:
Not saying that you did ... but I have always had a problem with advice that starts out with "try this" and ends with "it might work". :-)
When it comes to fixing upgrades that don't work, the first piece of advice should be to make sure that you have a recent backup, and if you don't, do what you can to preserve as much of your data as possible. (If you can't, that too is a learning experience, but one we'd rather you don't go through.) And, the whole idea of "it might work" suggestions is that if they do work, it's faster than a reinstall and if it doesn't, all you've lost is time. And of course, if this is a production machine and time is the one thing you don't have, a clean install may well be your only choice.
Agree. The problem with "it might work" you answered yourself in the next paragraph. As for 'saving your data'? Whatever happened to backups and 'other places'? I have some valubal 'stuff' on my computer. Valuable enough that I also hat it in three other places.
One of the problems with this type of support is that those of us offering help only have a limited knowledge of your situation and in many cases, it's hard to narrow things down enough to be sure that what you tell somebody to do is the right thing. Thus, you sometimes have to tell them how to recover, provided that you've guessed right about what happened, and hope that your guess wasn't too far off. That's why I'll sometimes ask questions about odd possibilities: I'm trying to narrow down the choices. (As an example, I'll often ask questions about hardware because it can save lots of time if that turns out to be the issue, and doesn't really waste any if it isn't.)
As I said. It is *much, much faster* for me to download the new release DVD and format and reinstall and then reconfigure than to roll the dice and hope for a successful upgrade.
As for stuff like 'my sound doesn't work'? Yeah work on that.
But the problem there is that are thousands and thousands of computers out there. And the 'same computer' bought from 'the same store' might not be exactly the same as the the same computer that you have bought at a different time from a different store.
As for laptops? The same two on the same shelf in the same store could very well be different from the one next to it.
An honest observation? My point of view?
Grandma/pa want to email the grand kids. To view the web for news perhaps. Then use Skype. Other things. They do not, IMO, want to type 'stuff' to get things to 'just work'.
Which is what I see from that base disto whose name begins with a 'U'. Really? Yeah. I had an old friend from almost 25 years ago beg me to join their user list. I won't name the distros but I see people that I have not seen 'around' for years.
IMHO? If 'you' want Linux to be accepted as a 'real' OS/Desktop by the general public? It has to work without all of the really cool Linux geeky crap that Linux zealots love so much.
You have a great day.
On 10/23/2013 2:07 AM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 10/22/2013 10:21 PM, David wrote:
Retired and on the couch does not equate with 'need my machine'. *If you* have enough time to play games for days, or weeks, help yourself.
It also helps, of course, that I also have a laptop running Fedora and I always upgrade it first. My desktop only gets upgraded after I'm sure that the laptop's working properly.
Me? I take the 'short path' and solve the problem. Your choice.
Naturally. I wouldn't even consider trying that on a production machine, or even a workstation in a Linux shop. That's why I made a point of stating that I'm retired and have the time, so that nobody would think I was suggesting that trying to recover from a failed upgrade is the right move for anybody else.
I don't recall if the OP, the person with the problem, said that this was one-of-two machines. It did not read like that.
As for a 'learning experience? Perhaps. BUT IMHO Joe/Jane User wants a machine that works not one that needs fixing. Like your car. Or household appliances. Tools. Etc.
David
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 15:51:52 -0400, David wrote: [....]
Excuse me. A question or two?
You messed up an upgrade over a week ago, maybe two(?), and you still have no solution.
Well, actually, since September 23. (My main question at that time was whether the problem was in the hard- or software; and I don't believe I've yet gotten a definite answer.)
How would this time spend 'broken' compare with the time it would have taken to copy your important files, format the drive, and install the never release. Then put back your files and do the tweaks?
:-)
The immediate answer is that I concur with Joe Zeff and Javier Perez. I'm long retired (fifteen years next month), and little concerned with efficiency.
I don't know about you, but besides being an autodidact, I'm really too old for this; I forget things, especially when backing up, even if I'm not interrupted. Or worse, I give bad commands and get things like a big file that includes a copy of itself, which includes (... , etc., recursively, till the drive surrendered; that time I finally did give up and install afresh.) When I last spent most of my time learning things, the PC had not been invented.
The other approach would have taken more time, been more tedious as well as more prone to error, and offered no chance to discover something useful (nor to enjoy the intellectual company of the better- instructed). Neither would it, afaik, have told me whether my hard- or software need healing.
For one thing, my trifocal fingers and arthritic eyeballs slow me way down. For another, my CLI-foo is minuscule -- I've probably studied too many languages (natural, not computer-) for too long, so that now those memory banks are overstuffed, whether or not the eyes and fingers function. (Anybody want a lecture on Old High German? Minnesang? History of Balto-Fennic grammar?)
Also, the problem machine is my most expendable. If I succeed with upgrading it (as I often do, believe it or not), then I can risk tackling the next more important, and so up.
Having had occasional disasters with backing up, I seldom relinquish an old machine, and keep several largely interchangeable, so that when (not if) I bollix one so badly that I can't get it online, I'll be able to keep up my normal activities while howling aside for help.
What's more, with several machines I can do enough of the backing up with a GUI instead of a CLI so that there's a much better chance I'll get it right. That bottom line in my .sig is what the late Goethe would have called "sehr ernste Scherze."
And I learn, slowly, but I do learn. I can often read a man page now, and even make a stab at which one to read.
Finally, I had a hunch that the downgrade would break again, but respond to the completion command. Bad hunch :
[....] --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.10(libcrypto.so.10) for package: fetchmail-6.3.22-2.fc18.i686 --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.10(libcrypto.so.10) for package: python-libs-2.7.3-13.fc18.i686 --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.10 for package: wget-1.14-5.fc18.i686 --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.10 for package: 1:qt-4.8.5-10.fc18.i686 --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.10 for package: 2:nmap- ncat-6.40-1.fc18.i686 --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.10 for package: socat-1.7.2.2-1.fc18.i686 --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.10 for package: dillo-3.0.3-1.fc18.i686 --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.10 for package: stunnel-4.56-1.fc18.i686 Killed [root@T30 ~]# yum-complete-transaction BDB2053 Freeing read locks for locker 0x7c: 8855/3078112960 BDB2053 Freeing read locks for locker 0x7e: 8855/3078112960 BDB2053 Freeing read locks for locker 0x7f: 8855/3078112960 BDB2053 Freeing read locks for locker 0x80: 8855/3078112960 Loaded plugins: langpacks, refresh-packagekit rpmfusion-free- updates | 3.3 kB 00:00:00 rpmfusion-nonfree- updates | 3.3 kB 00:00:00 updates/19/i386/ metalink | 18 kB 00:00:00 updates | 4.6 kB 00:00:00 updates/19/i386/ primary_db | 7.7 MB 00:00:03 (1/2): updates/19/i386/ pkgtags | 624 kB 00:00:01 (2/2): updates/19/i386/ updateinfo | 822 kB 00:00:01 No unfinished transactions left. [root@T30 ~]#
Hitting it with one more hammer also failed :
[root@T30 ~]# yum-complete-transaction --skip-broken Loaded plugins: langpacks, refresh-packagekit No unfinished transactions left. [root@T30 ~]#
At this point I began trying install disks. Oddly enough, the first one enabled the brightness control; so meseems the hardware is not broken yet. I'm in process of downloading a fresh DVD of CentOS 6.4; this thread can be filed away. Having been through it, I plan to wait for F20 for my other machines, skipping F19 or perhaps running FedUp twice in short order ....
On 10/23/2013 1:12 PM, Beartooth wrote:
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 15:51:52 -0400, David wrote: [....]
Excuse me. A question or two?
You messed up an upgrade over a week ago, maybe two(?), and you still have no solution.
Well, actually, since September 23. (My main question at that time was whether the problem was in the hard- or software; and I don't believe I've yet gotten a definite answer.)
How would this time spend 'broken' compare with the time it would have taken to copy your important files, format the drive, and install the never release. Then put back your files and do the tweaks?
:-)
The immediate answer is that I concur with Joe Zeff and Javier Perez. I'm long retired (fifteen years next month), and little concerned with efficiency.
I don't know about you, but besides being an autodidact, I'm really too old for this; I forget things, especially when backing up, even if I'm not interrupted. Or worse, I give bad commands and get things like a big file that includes a copy of itself, which includes (... , etc., recursively, till the drive surrendered; that time I finally did give up and install afresh.) When I last spent most of my time learning things, the PC had not been invented.
The other approach would have taken more time, been more tedious as well as more prone to error, and offered no chance to discover something useful (nor to enjoy the intellectual company of the better- instructed). Neither would it, afaik, have told me whether my hard- or software need healing.
For one thing, my trifocal fingers and arthritic eyeballs slow me way down. For another, my CLI-foo is minuscule -- I've probably studied too many languages (natural, not computer-) for too long, so that now those memory banks are overstuffed, whether or not the eyes and fingers function. (Anybody want a lecture on Old High German? Minnesang? History of Balto-Fennic grammar?)
Also, the problem machine is my most expendable. If I succeed with upgrading it (as I often do, believe it or not), then I can risk tackling the next more important, and so up.
Having had occasional disasters with backing up, I seldom relinquish an old machine, and keep several largely interchangeable, so that when (not if) I bollix one so badly that I can't get it online, I'll be able to keep up my normal activities while howling aside for help.
What's more, with several machines I can do enough of the backing up with a GUI instead of a CLI so that there's a much better chance I'll get it right. That bottom line in my .sig is what the late Goethe would have called "sehr ernste Scherze."
And I learn, slowly, but I do learn. I can often read a man page now, and even make a stab at which one to read.
Finally, I had a hunch that the downgrade would break again, but respond to the completion command. Bad hunch :
[....] --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.10(libcrypto.so.10) for package: fetchmail-6.3.22-2.fc18.i686 --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.10(libcrypto.so.10) for package: python-libs-2.7.3-13.fc18.i686 --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.10 for package: wget-1.14-5.fc18.i686 --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.10 for package: 1:qt-4.8.5-10.fc18.i686 --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.10 for package: 2:nmap- ncat-6.40-1.fc18.i686 --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.10 for package: socat-1.7.2.2-1.fc18.i686 --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.10 for package: dillo-3.0.3-1.fc18.i686 --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.10 for package: stunnel-4.56-1.fc18.i686 Killed [root@T30 ~]# yum-complete-transaction BDB2053 Freeing read locks for locker 0x7c: 8855/3078112960 BDB2053 Freeing read locks for locker 0x7e: 8855/3078112960 BDB2053 Freeing read locks for locker 0x7f: 8855/3078112960 BDB2053 Freeing read locks for locker 0x80: 8855/3078112960 Loaded plugins: langpacks, refresh-packagekit rpmfusion-free- updates | 3.3 kB 00:00:00 rpmfusion-nonfree- updates | 3.3 kB 00:00:00 updates/19/i386/ metalink | 18 kB 00:00:00 updates | 4.6 kB 00:00:00 updates/19/i386/ primary_db | 7.7 MB 00:00:03 (1/2): updates/19/i386/ pkgtags | 624 kB 00:00:01 (2/2): updates/19/i386/ updateinfo | 822 kB 00:00:01 No unfinished transactions left. [root@T30 ~]#
Hitting it with one more hammer also failed :
[root@T30 ~]# yum-complete-transaction --skip-broken Loaded plugins: langpacks, refresh-packagekit No unfinished transactions left. [root@T30 ~]#
At this point I began trying install disks. Oddly enough, the first one enabled the brightness control; so meseems the hardware is not broken yet. I'm in process of downloading a fresh DVD of CentOS 6.4; this thread can be filed away. Having been through it, I plan to wait for F20 for my other machines, skipping F19 or perhaps running FedUp twice in short order ....
There is only one Linux distribution that I have ever had any real, painless success upgrading from release, modified and used, to the next release. And that is not Fedora. And no it is *not* Ubuntu. :-) The only success *I* have had with a Fedora update was with a fresh install of one release, run and updated, to a 'same-day' upgrade of the next release. Nothing added or modified. Just the 'default' install.
I have however seen others that have talked about success but I have never seen them mention any 'major changes'. I have seen what looks to me like '3rd party stuff', you show rpmfusion, being a problem since some 3rd party repos might not be enabled for the update.
I have never tried to downgrade a version but I have downgraded packages.
Fedora's rawhide, which updates daily, does actually update from version to next version painlessly though. And contrary to popular belief is not 'always broken'.
I do not recall if you said that you and tried a Live-CD to test your hardware against Fedora 19.
I feel your pain. But I think that you are trying to ride a sick, if not dead, horse. :-(
On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 14:58:54 -0400, David wrote:
On 10/23/2013 1:12 PM, Beartooth wrote:
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 15:51:52 -0400, David wrote: [....]
You messed up an upgrade over a week ago, maybe two(?), and you still have no solution.
Well, actually, since September 23. (My main question at that time was whether the problem was in the hard- or software; and I don't believe I've yet gotten a definite answer.) [....]
[....] I began trying install disks. Oddly enough, the first one enabled the brightness control; so maybe the hardware is not broken yet. I'm in process of downloading a fresh DVD of CentOS 6.4 >>
netinstall; this
thread can be filed away.
Having been through it, I plan to wait for F20 for my other machines, skipping F19 or perhaps running FedUp twice in short order ....
[....]
I have however seen others that have talked about success but I have never seen them mention any 'major changes'. I have seen what looks to me like '3rd party stuff', you show rpmfusion, being a problem since some 3rd party repos might not be enabled for the update.
If you mouse around a bit on the rpmfusion site, you'll find it has an impressive pedigree. So I've been using it, literally since it went online -- w/o, afaict, ever having had any trouble that came from it.
[....] I feel your pain. But I think that you are trying to ride a sick, if not dead, horse. :-(
Yes, I did finally give it the coup de grace a couple days ago. After several false starts, I did a netinstall of CentOS 6.4.
I chose the minimal this time, and I think that helped. I spent a day or two combing through the add/remove software function, removing things I know I won't use. Now I'm combing through it again, adding things I know I will use, if I can find them, knowing there will be a few favorites I won't be able to get CentOS rpms for. (They're a large reason I keep as many machines as I can running Fedora.)
I'm sorry to be reporting that the original attempt failed (and I'm *still* not sure whether I have a hardware problem! GUI stuff looks normal, but I can't get my terminal enough contrast to make it readable without squinting.) Nevertheless, it has been an instructive failure, and I thank all of you heartily for bearing with me.
-
Beartooth -
David -
Javier Perez -
Joe Zeff -
Rex Dieter