Hi!
Am 14.04.25 um 13:18 schrieb Marcin Juszkiewicz:
I wonder where from all those "not owned by any package" files came
from. This system is about 12 years old (was Fedora 19 at start).
See also
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/5XG7VCLRSUT2LG
On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 01:37:47PM +1000, Ian Laurie via devel wrote:
> On 16/4/25 12:40, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> > dnf reinstall filesystem -y | cat
>
> Thanks, that provides the clue.
>
> /usr/sbin cannot be merged, /usr/sbin/expressvpnd points to
> /usr/bin/expressvpnd
> /usr/sbin cannot be m
On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 08:00:44AM +0200, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> iscsi-initiator-utils-6.2.1.10-0.gitd0f04ae.fc41.1.x86_64
> iscsi-initiator-utils-iscsiuio-6.2.1.10-0.gitd0f04ae.fc41.1.x86_64
iscsi-initiator-utils-6.2.1.10-0.gitd0f04ae.fc42.3 was built, but
the automatic update was unpushed
W dniu 14.04.2025 o 13:18, Marcin Juszkiewicz pisze:
I wanted to check it on my local system:
[..]
I wonder where from all those "not owned by any package" files came
from. This system is about 12 years old (was Fedora 19 at start).
I took some time with https://packages.debian.org/ and fo
On 16/4/25 13:37, Ian Laurie via devel wrote:
On 16/4/25 12:40, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
dnf reinstall filesystem -y | cat
Thanks, that provides the clue.
/usr/sbin cannot be merged, /usr/sbin/expressvpnd points to /usr/bin/
expressvpnd
/usr/sbin cannot be merged, /usr/sbin/expressvpnd points
On 16/4/25 12:40, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
dnf reinstall filesystem -y | cat
Thanks, that provides the clue.
/usr/sbin cannot be merged, /usr/sbin/expressvpnd points to
/usr/bin/expressvpnd
/usr/sbin cannot be merged, /usr/sbin/expressvpnd points to
/usr/bin/expressvpnd
Seems a bit weird sin
On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 12:52 AM Ian Laurie via devel
wrote:
> Reinstalling filesystem doesn't provide messaging relating to the merge
> script.
As I recall (someone else posted this)
you need to do a:
dnf reinstall filesystem -y | cat
to get the essential messages
about the why. Perhaps o
On 16/4/25 09:54, Ian Laurie via devel wrote:
I then removed iptables-legacy also, now I have nothing going to /etc/
alternatives but still no merge, weird.
Reinstalling filesystem doesn't provide messaging relating to the merge
script.
Running transaction
[1/4] Verify package files
On 16/4/25 09:41, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
I *think* all those are part of the iptables-nft package
if you want to try to remove that package, and see
if the merge can be completed.
Well removing iptables-nft made the list smaller:
ip6tables -> /etc/alternatives/ip6tables
ip6tables-restore -> /e
On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 11:26 PM Ian Laurie via devel
wrote:
>
> Thanks guys. Seems in may case more that just a couple:
>
...
I *think* all those are part of the iptables-nft package
if you want to try to remove that package, and see
if the merge can be completed.
--
_
On 15/4/25 22:40, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 12:47:08PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
ls -l | grep /etc/alternatives
then you will likely find a couple of symlinks using
the alternatives framework.
Once
that's done, the upgraded systems should get the merge aut
On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 12:47:08PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 15-Apr-25 2:30 AM, Ian Laurie via devel wrote:
> > On 14/4/25 21:14, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> >> As I understand it, the migration will happen automatically as soon as
> >> it is possible, so you *can't* do it earlier manu
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 08:47:51PM +0900, Dominique Martinet wrote:
> Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote on Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 01:18:52PM +0200:
> > I wonder where from all those "not owned by any package" files came from.
> > This system is about 12 years old (was Fedora 19 at start).
>
> I have a simila
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 10:29:59AM +0200, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> Rajeesh K V venit, vidit, dixit 2025-04-14 06:19:33:
> > > During the upgrade I've noticed this message output in the console:
> > > /usr/sbin cannot be merged, /usr/sbin/arptables points to
> > > /etc/alternatives/arptables
> > >
Hi,
On 15-Apr-25 2:30 AM, Ian Laurie via devel wrote:
> On 14/4/25 21:14, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>> As I understand it, the migration will happen automatically as soon as
>> it is possible, so you *can't* do it earlier manually.
>
> My wrinkle is a bit different.
>
> My /usr/local/sbin is a link
On 14/4/25 21:14, Fabio Valentini wrote:
As I understand it, the migration will happen automatically as soon as
it is possible, so you *can't* do it earlier manually.
My wrinkle is a bit different.
My /usr/local/sbin is a link, but my /usr/sbin still exists even though
it contains nothing but
> During the upgrade I've noticed this message output in the console:
> /usr/sbin cannot be merged, /usr/sbin/arptables points to
> /etc/alternatives/arptables
> I assume it's related to
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin but I'm not
> sure if anything needs to be fixed.
Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote on Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 01:18:52PM +0200:
> I wonder where from all those "not owned by any package" files came from.
> This system is about 12 years old (was Fedora 19 at start).
I have a similar list of files in there, just looked at one at random:
> file /usr/sbin/capsh
On 14/04/2025 12:18, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
I wanted to check it on my local system:
$ LC_ALL=C rpm -qf `find /usr/sbin /usr/local/sbin -type f`|sort -u
bpftool-7.5.0-2.fc42.x86_64
dnsmasq-2.90-4.fc42.x86_64
file /usr/sbin/avmcapictrl is not owned by any package
file /usr/sbin/capiinit is no
W dniu 14.04.2025 o 10:29, Michael J Gruber pisze:
A simpler check is `find /usr/sbin /usr/local/sbin -type f` which shows
you everything that isnot symlinked already.
`ls -l /usr/local/sbin` shows me that it is a directory symlink already,
whereas `ls -l /usr/sbin` shows me many symlinks plus t
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 6:21 AM Rajeesh K V wrote:
>
> > During the upgrade I've noticed this message output in the console:
> > /usr/sbin cannot be merged, /usr/sbin/arptables points to
> > /etc/alternatives/arptables
> > I assume it's related to
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_b
Rajeesh K V venit, vidit, dixit 2025-04-14 06:19:33:
> > During the upgrade I've noticed this message output in the console:
> > /usr/sbin cannot be merged, /usr/sbin/arptables points to
> > /etc/alternatives/arptables
> > I assume it's related to
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bi
> During the upgrade I've noticed this message output in the console:
> /usr/sbin cannot be merged, /usr/sbin/arptables points to
> /etc/alternatives/arptables
> I assume it's related to
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin but I'm not
> sure if anything needs to be fixed.
I
I'd like to write down some notes from my actual attempt of upgrading my
F41 workstation to F42. The upgrade went well, but I noticed some glitches.
The dnf system-upgrade command failed at first because of a broken
python-qt5 upgrade path. I dropped a note on the update [1] to push it
to stabl
24 matches
Mail list logo
