On Tue, 2021-11-30 at 11:26 +, John Pilkington wrote:
> For several recent kernel updates, dnf has complained about this but
> has updated as normal. I've just noticed that the package name
> looks strange, too. Should it get a BZ?
.drpm files are delta RPMs. Small differences between one v
On 11/30/21 11:35, John Pilkington wrote:
On 30/11/2021 19:23, Samuel Sieb wrote:
The mismatch can be caused by one of the files getting changed on the
system. Then the delta won't apply correctly and the result won't
match what is expected.
Yes, I realised after sending that a 'diff' has tw
On 30/11/2021 19:23, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 11/30/21 03:26, John Pilkington wrote:
For several recent kernel updates, dnf has complained about this but
has updated as normal. I've just noticed that the package name looks
strange, too. Should it get a BZ?
/var/cache/dnf/updates-1eb77e9f45b439
On 11/30/21 03:26, John Pilkington wrote:
For several recent kernel updates, dnf has complained about this but has
updated as normal. I've just noticed that the package name looks
strange, too. Should it get a BZ?
/var/cache/dnf/updates-1eb77e9f45b4391a/packages/kernel-devel-5.15.4-101.fc34_
On 30.11.21 12:26, John Pilkington wrote:
For several recent kernel updates, dnf has complained about this but has
updated as normal. I've just noticed that the package name looks
strange, too. Should it get a BZ?
FWIW, I think this is needed by the rpmfusion nVidia packages. :-)
/var/cac
For several recent kernel updates, dnf has complained about this but has
updated as normal. I've just noticed that the package name looks
strange, too. Should it get a BZ?
FWIW, I think this is needed by the rpmfusion nVidia packages. :-)
Thanks,
John P
{{{
Downloading Packages:
(1/6): ke
