Re: fedup FC20 - FC21 update conflicts
On 12/10/2014 10:36 PM, Przemek Klosowski wrote: I imagine there will be fc21 packages for those eventually, so should I file a bugzilla report on it, or go ahead with the install and wait for the new versions? If reporting, would it be against fedup or specific packages? Do not wait. If package is missing in next version of Fedora it was either: 1) removed without replacement. In this case nothing should require it. So it is bug. 2) it was replaced by another package, which forgot to specify correct Provides/Obsoletes. And it is bug as well. So in both cases please file Bugzilla report. However fedup is innocent in this case. If you are unsure which package is the cause, choose the package which requires missing dependency and I'm sure the maintainer will reassign it to correct component. Example of such report is here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149675 It is good habit to do dry upgrade to Beta or Alpha release and report the issues, so maintainers have time to fix it before final release. I described it here: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/blog/archives/2013/10/07/donate_1_minute_of_your_time_to_test_upgrades_from_f19_to_f20/index.html -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCE, RHCDS Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: fedup FC20 - FC21 update conflicts
On Wednesday, December 10, 2014 04:36:09 PM Przemek Klosowski wrote: icedtea-web-1.5.2-0.fc20.x86_64 requires java-1.7.0-openjdk-1:1.7.0.71-2.5.3.0.fc20.x86_64 OpenJDK 7 has been dropped from F21. You would get prompt answer from fedora- java mailing list. $ rpm -qa | grep icedtea icedtea-web-1.5.1-1.fc21.x86_64 $ rpm -qa | grep openjdk java-1.8.0-openjdk-headless-1.8.0.25-4.b18.fc21.x86_64 java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel-1.8.0.25-4.b18.fc21.x86_64 java-1.8.0-openjdk-1.8.0.25-4.b18.fc21.x86_64 -- Regards, Sudhir Khanger, sudhirkhanger.com, github.com/donniezazen, 5577 8CDB A059 085D 1D60 807F 8C00 45D9 F5EF C394. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: fedup FC20 - FC21 update conflicts
On Fri, 12 Dec 2014, Sudhir Khanger wrote: icedtea-web-1.5.2-0.fc20.x86_64 requires java-1.7.0-openjdk-1:1.7.0.71-2.5.3.0.fc20.x86_64 OpenJDK 7 has been dropped from F21. You would get prompt answer from fedora- java mailing list. $ rpm -qa | grep icedtea icedtea-web-1.5.1-1.fc21.x86_64 $ rpm -qa | grep openjdk java-1.8.0-openjdk-headless-1.8.0.25-4.b18.fc21.x86_64 java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel-1.8.0.25-4.b18.fc21.x86_64 java-1.8.0-openjdk-1.8.0.25-4.b18.fc21.x86_64 I ran into the same problem using fedup f20 - f21. I think the problem was that icedtea-web-1.5.2-0 was pushed to f20 (on 12/7) before it was pushed to f21 (12/12), so fedup saw the f21 icedtea-web as a downgrade. A distro-sync fixed it for me, I believe. Scott -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
fedup FC20 - FC21 update conflicts
I have a fairly standard FC20 setup which I started upgrading by fedup --network 21 --product=workstation There were 109 packages for which there was no upgrade; 62 are *-debuginfo, 12 are from various oddball repos (adobe, simulavr, etc), but 36 are I believe regular Fedora Core 20 packages, including fairly important ones like 8 related to the R language. Two of those result in packaging conflicts and fedup warns about 'upgrade at your own risk': icedtea-web-1.5.2-0.fc20.x86_64 requires java-1.7.0-openjdk-1:1.7.0.71-2.5.3.0.fc20.x86_64 R-core-3.1.2-1.fc20.x86_64 requires tk-1:8.5.14-1.fc20.x86_64, tcl-1:8.5.14-1.fc20.x86_64, libicu-50.1.2-10.fc20.x86_64 I imagine there will be fc21 packages for those eventually, so should I file a bugzilla report on it, or go ahead with the install and wait for the new versions? If reporting, would it be against fedup or specific packages? yum list icedtea-web R-core java-1.7.0-openjdk tk tcl libicu returns: Loaded plugins: auto-update-debuginfo, langpacks, refresh-packagekit Installed Packages R-core.x86_64 3.1.2-1.fc20@updates icedtea-web.x86_64 1.5.2-0.fc20 @updates java-1.7.0-openjdk.x86_64 1:1.7.0.71-2.5.3.0.fc20@updates libicu.i686 50.1.2-10.fc20 installed libicu.x86_64 50.1.2-10.fc20 installed tcl.x86_64 1:8.5.14-1.fc20 installed tk.x86_64 1:8.5.14-1.fc20 installed -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: fedup FC20 - FC21 update conflicts
On 12/10/2014 01:36 PM, Przemek Klosowski wrote: I imagine there will be fc21 packages for those eventually, so should I file a bugzilla report on it, or go ahead with the install and wait for the new versions? If reporting, would it be against fedup or specific packages? Try adding --enablerepo=updates-testing to the fedup command line. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
