Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> This always baffles me... Fedora includes irrelevant keys. For
> example, old keys and keys for different arches. Something feels wrong
> about trusting them.
You don't have to trust them if you don't want. :)
Other than for upgrades, they're not automatically used, so
tru
Once upon a time, Jeffrey Walton said:
> This always baffles me... Fedora includes irrelevant keys. For
> example, old keys and keys for different arches. Something feels wrong
> about trusting them.
The arch-specific keys are symlinks.
The files in /etc/pki/rpm-gpg are not all in your RPM datab
On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 9:43 PM Todd Zullinger wrote:
>
> Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> > To upgrade from Fedora-37 to Fedora-38 the instructions
> > (https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/dnf-system-upgrade/) sa
> > y:
> >...
> >5. When the new GPG key is imported, you are asked to
Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> To upgrade from Fedora-37 to Fedora-38 the instructions
> (https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/dnf-system-upgrade/) sa
> y:
>...
>5. When the new GPG key is imported, you are asked to verify the key’s
>fingerprint. Refer to https://getfedora.org/sec
Wolfgang Pfeiffer writes:
On Sun, May 02, 2021 at 11:09:20AM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
I just started the upgrade on another laptop, but after plymouth came
up, it bumped down to the system console to run the upgrade. It's
running now just fine, on the system console. I don't recall if thi
Ed Greshko writes:
On 02/05/2021 23:09, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
I was surprised to see that "dnf system-upgrade log" offered me logs going
all the way back to the F30-F31 upgrade in 2019. They certainly don't take
up much space, but I'm just wondering if they ever get cleaned up. I don't
se
On Sun, May 02, 2021 at 11:09:20AM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
I just started the upgrade on another laptop, but after plymouth came
up, it bumped down to the system console to run the upgrade. It's
running now just fine, on the system console. I don't recall if this
laptop always did that, so
On 02/05/2021 23:09, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
I was surprised to see that "dnf system-upgrade log" offered me logs going all the way back to the F30-F31 upgrade in 2019. They certainly don't take up much space, but I'm just wondering if they ever get cleaned up. I don't see a dnf option to do that.
On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 19:55:24 -0300 "George N. White III"
wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 at 13:57, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
>
> > So, I have been trying to upgrade this fully updated f31 machine on the
> > CLI. I have tried the following:
> >
> >
> > $ sudo dnf --refresh upgrade
> > Adobe Systems Incor
You might do a "rpm -qa | grep -v fc31 | sort" and post that output.
That will tell you all packages that don't have the fc31 label on it,
a fair number of those packages won't have a problem, but it is likely
that if the prior user installed non-fc and non-rpmfustion rpms that
it could have made
On 9/2/20 11:41 PM, Thomas Klein wrote:
That said, you didn't explicitly mention whether you did **install the "Fedora
update utility"**
Could it be you didn't do that:
"sudo dnf install dnf-plugin-system-upgrade"
FWIW, to be on the safe side (sorry if this of no help) here's the process:
-
Ranjan,
I'm having the same packages as you (openh264, ... and a trunkload of MORE
stuff from "outside fedora") and never have experienced any problem when
upgrading.
That said, you didn't explicitly mention whether you did **install the "Fedora
update utility"**
Could it be you didn't do tha
On 2020-09-03 02:10, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 10:51:26 -0700 Samuel Sieb wrote:
>
>> On 9/2/20 9:56 AM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
>>> $ sudo dnf distro-sync
>>> Last metadata expiration check: 0:14:06 ago on Wed 02 Sep 2020 11:22:53 AM
>>> CDT.
>>> Error:
>>> Problem: The operation
On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 at 13:57, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> So, I have been trying to upgrade this fully updated f31 machine on the
> CLI. I have tried the following:
>
>
> $ sudo dnf --refresh upgrade
> Adobe Systems Incorporated 17 kB/s | 2.9 kB 00:00
> Fedora 31 openh264 (Fr
On 9/2/20 3:30 PM, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
might want to try adding --allowerasing to the dnf upgrade option.
I just upgraded some systems, and it seemed that fc31 had some newer
versions of packages than the fc32, and they had to be downgraded for
the update to go thru. You could
On 9/2/20 1:38 PM, Andras Simon wrote:
You seem to have a lot of non-Fedora repos enabled. For example
Adobe Systems Incorporated
Fedora 31 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64
This is actually a Fedora supplied repo config.
google-chrome
etc.
I'd remove the packages which comes from these repos
On 2 Sep 2020 at 13:10, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
Date sent: Wed, 2 Sep 2020 13:10:28 -0500
From: Ranjan Maitra
To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject:Re: system-upgrade f31 to f32 on CLI fails
Organization: Mailbox
On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 22:38:14 +0200 Andras Simon wrote:
> 2020-09-02 20:10 UTC+02:00, Ranjan Maitra :
> > On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 10:51:26 -0700 Samuel Sieb wrote:
>
> >> Have you installed any packages from outside Fedora's repos?
> >
> > I don't know the answer: a student who knows quite a bit about
2020-09-02 20:10 UTC+02:00, Ranjan Maitra :
> On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 10:51:26 -0700 Samuel Sieb wrote:
>> Have you installed any packages from outside Fedora's repos?
>
> I don't know the answer: a student who knows quite a bit about Fedora used
> to use it. But it has never been a problem to upgrade
On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 10:51:26 -0700 Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 9/2/20 9:56 AM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> > $ sudo dnf distro-sync
> > Last metadata expiration check: 0:14:06 ago on Wed 02 Sep 2020 11:22:53 AM
> > CDT.
> > Error:
> > Problem: The operation would result in removing the following protect
On 9/2/20 9:56 AM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
$ sudo dnf distro-sync
Last metadata expiration check: 0:14:06 ago on Wed 02 Sep 2020 11:22:53 AM CDT.
Error:
Problem: The operation would result in removing the following protected
packages: dnf, systemd, systemd-udev
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip
On 1 Sep 2020 at 19:17, Samuel Sieb wrote:
Subject:Re: system-upgrade
To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
From: Samuel Sieb
Date sent: Tue, 1 Sep 2020 19:17:36 -0700
Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users
On 9/1/20 6:54 PM, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
I'd recommand doing one version upgrade at a time.
You are suppose to be able to upgrade 2 versions, but I once had it fail
and system was not easily fixable, so just did a clean install that was a
pain to get back to the state of the syste
I'd recommand doing one version upgrade at a time.
You are suppose to be able to upgrade 2 versions, but I once had it fail
and system was not easily fixable, so just did a clean install that was a
pain to get back to the state of the system.
I just updated two machines from fc31 to fc32 using d
On Tue, 2020-09-01 at 18:40 +0200, François Patte wrote:
> Bonjour,
>
> I have a computer which runs fedora 29, may I use dnf system-upgrade to
> upgrade to fedora 32?
>
> Thank you.
>
> If not, what is the safer way to upgrade?
system-upgrade is expected to work across two versions, but not
ne
> Only skipping a single version is "supported". You should upgrade to
> either F29 or F30 before going to F31. I would recommend F29 if you want
> to get to F31 or else go to F30, then F32.
Thanks, F28 -> F30 apparently works.
___
users mailing list --
On 5/11/20 9:47 AM, Frédéric wrote:
I would like to upgrade a system from F28 to F31. But I get the following error:
Only skipping a single version is "supported". You should upgrade to
either F29 or F30 before going to F31. I would recommend F29 if you want
to get to F31 or else go to F30,
People,
On 2020-01-17 08:35, George N. White III wrote:
Before bash got PS0 there was bash-preexec.sh [1]. If your system
was
upgraded serially from before PS0 came to bash this might be leftovers
from bash-preexec.sh.
Sounds plausible - and:
On 2020-01-17 09:03, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On
On 1/16/20 2:43 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 2020-01-17 06:03, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 1/16/20 1:56 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
Oh, BTW, I have
[egreshko@f31k ~]$ rpm -q setup
setup-2.13.6-1.fc31.noarch
And I know I've not altered /etc/bashrc and I get..
[egreshko@f31k ~]$ sha256sum /etc/bashrc
d925e7ec
On 2020-01-17 06:03, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 1/16/20 1:56 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
>> Oh, BTW, I have
>>
>> [egreshko@f31k ~]$ rpm -q setup
>> setup-2.13.6-1.fc31.noarch
>>
>> And I know I've not altered /etc/bashrc and I get..
>>
>> [egreshko@f31k ~]$ sha256sum /etc/bashrc
>> d925e7ec2fdd6861be5f3a6d
On 1/16/20 1:56 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
Oh, BTW, I have
[egreshko@f31k ~]$ rpm -q setup
setup-2.13.6-1.fc31.noarch
And I know I've not altered /etc/bashrc and I get..
[egreshko@f31k ~]$ sha256sum /etc/bashrc
d925e7ec2fdd6861be5f3a6d5a08a1ff13a10d23ebbb8d26717b1b75ca4f118f /etc/bashrc
You shoul
On 2020-01-17 05:19, Philip Rhoades wrote:
> - . /etc/bashrc -> prompt includes:
> "phr009D777;preexecphr009C\u009D777;preexec\u009C"
>
> I eventually worked out that this string is PS0 - but PS0 does not get set in
> /etc/bashrc as far as I can see . . I can work around the problem by
> resetti
On 2020-01-17 05:19, Philip Rhoades wrote:
> - . /etc/bashrc -> prompt includes:
> "phr009D777;preexecphr009C\u009D777;preexec\u009C"
>
> I eventually worked out that this string is PS0 - but PS0 does not get set in
> /etc/bashrc as far as I can see . . I can work around the problem by
> resetti
On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 17:20, Philip Rhoades wrote:
> People,
>
>
> On 2020-01-07 19:23, Philip Rhoades wrote:
> > People,
> >
> > I did a dnf system-upgrade and now I get this before the completion of
> > each CLI command:
> >
> > [phr@phil ~]$ ls
> > phr009D777;preexecphr009C',data=iris)'
> > .
People,
On 2020-01-07 19:23, Philip Rhoades wrote:
People,
I did a dnf system-upgrade and now I get this before the completion of
each CLI command:
[phr@phil ~]$ ls
phr009D777;preexecphr009C',data=iris)'
.
.
- before I start hacking around, has anyone else seen this?
I narrowed the proble
...
>
> ... If you're here (on
> this list) over any length of time, you might notice that there's only
> about two or three people who have answers to test-related questions.
I'm here - with interruption - since fc1 (Yarrow) !
;-)
___
users mailing li
On Fri, 2019-09-20 at 22:57 +, sixpack13 wrote:
> ..., but it was a F30 Question *too* !
>
> btw:
> I get somewhat "nervous" about your "don't do this and that on this
> and that list(s)"-shit !
Really, it was a F31 question (since it's about installing F31
packages, and specifically F31 be
On 9/21/19 7:56 AM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 9/20/19 3:57 PM, sixpack13 wrote:
..., but it was a F30 Question *too* !
btw:
I get somewhat "nervous" about your "don't do this and that on this and that
list(s)"
I don't think he should be quite so strict about people asking questions about
unre
On 9/20/19 3:57 PM, sixpack13 wrote:
..., but it was a F30 Question *too* !
btw:
I get somewhat "nervous" about your "don't do this and that on this and that
list(s)"
I don't think he should be quite so strict about people asking questions
about unreleased versions. But certainly a proble
..., but it was a F30 Question *too* !
btw:
I get somewhat "nervous" about your "don't do this and that on this and that
list(s)"-shit !
sixpack
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.f
On Fri, 2019-09-20 at 10:07 -0700, Alan wrote:
> System upgrade from Fedora 30 to Fedora 31-beta gives these errors
> (with --skip-broken)
Please keep F31 questions to the Fedora Test list.
poc
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 7:21 AM wrote:
>
> Make instead a link to /run/systemd/generator/install.mount or write
> an install.mount unit instead of using /etc/fstab
>
Thanks, I will try that when I have time for the next upgrade.
And the reason it says CIFS in the subject when it's an NFS mount
On Thu, 30 May 2019 11:07:50 +0200 francis.montag...@inria.fr wrote:
> [3] put links in it for:
...
> autofs.service
I was wrong here: you are not using autofs but the automount of
systemd.
Make instead a link to /run/systemd/generator/install.mount or write
an install.mount unit instead o
Hi.
On Wed, 29 May 2019 10:58:01 -0600 Greg Woods wrote:
> worldsys:/install /install nfsrw,x-systemd.automount 0 0
> Is it impossible to do a system-upgrade from a remote-mounted repo (which
> would defeat much of the purpose of maintaining such a repo), or is there a
> way
On 12/18/18 7:52 AM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
>> I'm trying to upgrade one of my machines at home from F27 to F28 using `dnf
>> system-upgrade` which is failing with errors related with GPG Key signature
>> failure for
>> certain packages. Investigating I see that all
>> those packages are to be "downgr
On 12/17/18 4:13 AM, Martín Marqués wrote:
I'm trying to upgrade one of my machines at home from F27 to F28 using
`dnf system-upgrade` which is failing with errors related with GPG Key
signature failure for certain packages. Investigating I see that all
those packages are to be "downgraded" for
On 12/17/18 7:13 AM, Martín Marqués wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to upgrade one of my machines at home from F27 to F28 using
`dnf system-upgrade` which is failing with errors related with GPG Key
signature failure for certain packages. Investigating I see that all
those packages are to be "downgrade
On Sat, 2018-12-08 at 13:17 +, Ewan Slater wrote:
> nothing (blank line).
Kindly quote some context when replying. HyperKitty doesn't do this by
default. Or use a real email client.
poc
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsu
That helped after a few goes.
The full story was:
1. sudo dnf remove system-upgrade
2. rm -rf /var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade*
3. dnf clean all
4. reboot
5. start again
It needed the reboot.
It's running now (fingers crossed).
Many thanks :-)
___
us
nothing (blank line).
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org
Ewan Slater writes:
@Sam - thanks, but it gives the same error.
rm -rf /var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade*
dnf clean all
If this is still doesn't work, something else is broken, not just dnf.
pgp5exjy5W8lP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
users maili
On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 11:15:13AM -, Ewan Slater wrote:
> I have tried repeating the process again from `sudo dnf upgrade --refresh`
> and removing and reinstalling system-upgrade, but I still get the same
> message.
> Any suggestions on how to get round this?
What does `dnf check` return?
On 12/7/18 3:15 AM, Ewan Slater wrote:
I'm trying to upgrade from 27 -> 28.
Yesterday I was running `sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=28` when
I had a power failure.
After I got power back, I tried to run it again I get the trace below.
I have tried repeating the process again fr
@Sam - thanks, but it gives the same error.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: htt
Ewan Slater writes:
Hi,
I'm trying to upgrade from 27 -> 28.
Yesterday I was running `sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=28`
when I had a power failure.
After I got power back, I tried to run it again I get the trace below.
I have tried repeating the process again from `sudo dn
Greg Woods writes:
system-upgrade downloaded all the packages from the "my" report without
any problems, but "system-upgrade reboot" apparently rebooted the server,
and the reboot apparently tried to sync again with the repo, but, of
course, since the repo is down it failed.
I'll
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 6:32 AM, Sam Varshavchik
wrote:
>
>
> The "my" repo contains locally-built packages. The repo is on the server
> being upgraded here. Normally, apache starts and provides access to the
> repo over http. Nothing exotic.
>
> system-upgrade downloaded all the packages from th
57 matches
Mail list logo
