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

[Kaushik Guha]

Thanks Kevin.

On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Kevin Martin <kevintm at ameritech.net> wrote:

>
>
> 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
>
> --
> users mailing list
> users at lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20120127/e9ae7664/attachment.html>