Unable to update/upgrade Fedora-16 due to yum Transaction error

[Kevin Martin]

On 01/27/2012 09:56 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 27.01.2012 16:15, schrieb Kevin Martin:
>>
>>
>> On 01/27/2012 08:51 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>> Am 27.01.2012 15:34, schrieb Kaushik Guha:
>>>> Dear Friends,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> While upgrading through "Yumex" ,everything is running well,except a problem is 
>>>> occurring while upgrading packages.
>>>>
>>>> 19:46:52 : YUM: warning: rpmts_HdrFromFdno: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID 8296fa0f: NOKEY
>>>> /19:46:52 : ERROR: Error in yum Transaction : Public key for npapi-vlc-1.2.0-0.3gitf568362.fc17.x86_64.rpm is not
>>>> installed/
>>>>
>>>> How to rectify the error in yum Transaction,on the last line.Please Help me.
>>> this package must not be in the F16 repo and i guess this is already fixed
>>> throw away yumex and type "yum cleanall && yum upgrade" in a root-shell if
>>> you do not want to wait
>>>
>> Install the public key or turn on "no GPG check" under options in Yumex.
>>
>> Kevin
> why in the world do you give such TOTALLY WRONG advises
> after a correct answer?
>
> a) .fc17 is not intented to be for F16
> b) "noGPG check" generally to set is a dumb action
>
>
>
>
>
Hmm, interesting question.

  I'm guessing, based on what's missing in his yumex output (you did notice that he had trimmed some stuff out of the middle, right)
that he has libvlc installed and has, at some point in the past, installed the npapi-vlc plugin for libvlc rpm and, perhaps, we're
not seeing an update request for libvlc (due to his trimming the output) which may also require, possibly, an update for npapi-vlc. 
He does have rpmfusion-free-rawhide-source as one of his active repositories, which is where the source for npapi-vlc comes from. 

So no, it's *not* in the F16 repo and perhaps no, it's not already fixed since there's nothing to fix and perhaps he enjoys using
yumex so your asinine comment to "throw away yumex" doesn't help matters at all and yes, you are correct that .fc17 is not
"intented" (intended, BTW) to be for F16 but, be that as it may, it still was picked up, probably as a result of some dependency
checking that was done. 

Oh, and by the way, it's "advice", not advises, and your "correct answer" was not necessarily correct at all, just your shooting
your mouth off without doing any actual research as to what may have occurred.  If you can't offer semi-knowledgeable advice, don't
attack people who do.

Kevin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20120127/7b7b33da/attachment.html>