Am 24.02.24 um 01:36 schrieb Samuel Sieb:
On 2/23/24 15:38, Sérgio Basto wrote:
On Sat, 2024-02-24 at 00:06 +0100, Ralf Corsépius wrote:
Am 23.02.24 um 22:37 schrieb Samuel Sieb:
On 2/23/24 10:50, Ralf Corsépius wrote:
# dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=40
...
No match for group package "multican"
...
WTH?
It was a program for controlling Canon cameras that has been
retired.
Some group you have installed has that package listed in it.
Ah, this likely explains why neither "dnf repoquery" nor "dnf group
list" could find "multican".
The comps
groups need to be cleaned out and that's just a warning.
Well, ... IMHO, most about comps and groups is in an embarrassing
unusable shape.
No match for group package "baekmuk-ttf-batang-fonts"
[snip]
No match for group package "util-linux-user"
I got these ones , is something on my rpm db ?
I am seeing these on another machine, too.
No. Well, sort of. As mentioned, those are packages that have been
removed from the distro, but are still listed in the comps groups. dnf
checks the installed groups for packages that need to be updated and
can't find these ones.
Really? How do I check for which groups I have installed?
At least I haven't found any way to check for them, neither with rpm nor
with dnf.
Finally, another issue:
...
Error:
Problem: conflicting requests
- package libva-intel-media-driver-24.1.3-1.fc40.i686 from fedora
conflicts with intel-media-driver provided by
intel-media-driver-24.1.3-1.fc40.x86_64 from rpmfusion-nonfree
- package libva-intel-media-driver-24.1.3-1.fc40.x86_64 from fedora
conflicts with intel-media-driver provided by
intel-media-driver-24.1.3-1.fc40.x86_64 from rpmfusion-nonfree
- problem with installed package intel-media-driver-23.4.3-1.fc39.x86_64
- intel-media-driver-23.4.3-1.fc39.x86_64 from @System does not
belong to a distupgrade repository
(try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting
packages or '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
I see 2 potential issues in there:
1. I think, I once "dnf swapped" these packages => Does "dnf
system-upgrade" handle "swapped" packages correctly?
2. Why does dnf system-upgrade wants to pull-in a i686 package in this
case? IMO, this doesn't make sense.
Ralf
--
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
