Re: DNF and broken upgrades
On Sun, 2017-08-06 at 14:21 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 06:16:43PM +0100, Russel Winder wrote: > > > I think `dnf distro-sync` should do it. > > > > I tried that but can't remember the exact output. It didn't do > > anything > > positive though. :-( > > Maybe with --best and --allow-erasing? Just as closure for this thread: over the past few days I have had to do some erasing to get a best install build and the problem seems to have gone away. I have no concrete data as to what actually cleared the problem but it has gone away. :-) -- Russel. = Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Roadm: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: DNF and broken upgrades
On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 06:16:43PM +0100, Russel Winder wrote: > > I think `dnf distro-sync` should do it. > I tried that but can't remember the exact output. It didn't do anything > positive though. :-( Maybe with --best and --allow-erasing? -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: DNF and broken upgrades
On Sun, 2017-08-06 at 07:49 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > […] > I think `dnf distro-sync` should do it. I tried that but can't remember the exact output. It didn't do anything positive though. :-( -- Russel. = Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Roadm: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: DNF and broken upgrades
On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 10:33:49AM +0100, Russel Winder wrote: > If there are one or two I remove the newest version manually and then > do the upgrade again. For 835 I am not about to even start this > process. "dnf remove --duplicates" refused to work because some of the > duplicates were protected. dnf and systemd in particular. OK so I can > handle doing those manually using the "--setopt=protected_package=" > options so as to be able to remove the newest version. So dnf and > systemd fully up to date. I think this is a bug. The protected-packages thing shouldn't block dupes from being removed, just make sure there's at least one functional package (of the primary architecture!). > I am thinking that "dnf remove --duplicates" isn't actually the right > way of fixing this sort of problem, that there is a better way of > handling barfed upgrades. I think `dnf distro-sync` should do it. -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
DNF and broken upgrades
I have just completed the recent Big Rawhide Upgrade on my laptops/workstations. I will admit to not using the lowest risk way of upgrading mostly because I don't want to have to work with each machine physically individually. I generally use an SSH login from another machine to keep the risk at Bash and Network Manager upgrade problems. This morning I got lazy (having upgraded the laptops using the normal approach) and upgraded my workstation from a terminal in an Wayland session on the workstation itself. Normally this is OK, today it failed. Part way through the "dnf upgrade", the terminal crashed, leaving me with masses of downloaded and installed but not yet upgraded packages. So I ended up with what dnf said was a fully upgraded machines and yet there were 835 duplicates, as reported by "dnf check". If there are one or two I remove the newest version manually and then do the upgrade again. For 835 I am not about to even start this process. "dnf remove --duplicates" refused to work because some of the duplicates were protected. dnf and systemd in particular. OK so I can handle doing those manually using the "--setopt=protected_package=" options so as to be able to remove the newest version. So dnf and systemd fully up to date. Now "dnf remove --duplicates" works – which is good. :-) However,… The "dnf list --installed" listing shows all the new packages from @System not from @rawhide. I am hoping this doesn't matter, but it is annoying. This is not the case for the package removed and re-upgraded manually, just for the ones 'fixed' using "dnf remove --duplicates". I am thinking that "dnf remove --duplicates" isn't actually the right way of fixing this sort of problem, that there is a better way of handling barfed upgrades. I also notice that "dnf list --showduplicates" highlights a lot of entries but there is no clear indication of what the problem is. -- Russel. = Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Roadm: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org