11:43 a.m.
Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal potential
problems.
You may also run `dnf upgrade` before running this command.
The `--assumeno` will just test the transaction, but does not make the actual upgrade.
In case you hit dependency issues, please report it against the appropriate package.
Or against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in Fedora 36. Please
check existing reports against
fedora-obsolete-packages first:
https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" (F36FailsToInstall)
reports:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_id=1992487&bug_id_type=an...
Thank you
Miroslav
6:01 p.m.
On 2022-03-11 09:43, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
sudo dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36
--enablerepo=updates-testing $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null &&
echo --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) --assumeno distro-sync
[sudo] password for luya:
Fedora 36 - x86_64 9.8 kB/s | 10 kB 00:01
Fedora 36 - x86_64 2.9 MB/s | 80 MB 00:27
Fedora 36 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64 537 B/s | 989 B 00:01
Fedora Modular 36 - x86_64 8.1 kB/s | 10 kB 00:01
Fedora Modular 36 - x86_64 609 kB/s | 2.3 MB 00:03
Fedora 36 - x86_64 - Updates 144 kB/s | 13 kB 00:00
Fedora 36 - x86_64 - Updates 125 B/s | 257 B 00:02
Fedora Modular 36 - x86_64 - Updates 823 B/s | 13 kB 00:16
Fedora Modular 36 - x86_64 - Updates 145 B/s | 257 B 00:01
Fedora 36 - x86_64 - Test Updates 1.6 MB/s | 8.0 MB 00:05
Fedora Modular 36 - x86_64 - Test Updates 76 kB/s | 318 kB 00:04
RPM Fusion for Fedora 36 - Free 21 kB/s | 5.3 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 36 - Free 1.2 MB/s | 949 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 36 - Free - Updates 21 kB/s | 5.2 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 36 - Free - Updates 589 B/s | 257 B 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 36 - Nonfree 22 kB/s | 5.5 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 36 - Nonfree 432 kB/s | 249 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 36 - Nonfree - Steam 21 kB/s | 5.4 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 36 - Nonfree - Steam 4.9 kB/s | 2.1 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 36 - Nonfree - Updates 20 kB/s | 5.1 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 36 - Nonfree - Updates 613 B/s | 257 B 00:00
Dependencies resolved.
================================================================================
Package Arch Version Repository Size
================================================================================
Installing:
kernel x86_64 5.17.0-0.rc7.116.fc36
fedora 157 k
kernel-modules x86_64 5.17.0-0.rc7.116.fc36
fedora 53 M
kernel-modules-extra x86_64 5.17.0-0.rc7.116.fc36
fedora 3.4 M
Upgrading:
[..snip...]
Installing group/module packages:
qgnomeplatform-qt5 x86_64 0.8.4-5.fc36 updates-testing 178 k
replacing qgnomeplatform.x86_64 0.8.4-4.fc35
rit-meera-new-fonts noarch 1.2.1-2.fc36 fedora 171 k
replacing smc-meera-fonts.noarch 7.0.3-4.fc35
Installing dependencies:
Lmod x86_64 8.6.11-1.fc36 fedora 228 k
MUMPS x86_64 5.4.1-2.fc36 fedora 1.9 M
MUMPS-common noarch 5.4.1-2.fc36 fedora 805 k
NetworkManager-initscripts-updown
noarch 1:1.36.0-0.11.fc36 fedora
14 k
adwaita-qt6 x86_64 1.4.1-3.fc36 updates-testing 101 k
byte-buddy noarch 1.12.0-3.fc36 fedora 2.9 M
byte-buddy-agent noarch 1.12.0-3.fc36 fedora 61 k
cgnslib x86_64 4.2.0-6.fc36 fedora 694 k
cgnslib-common noarch 4.2.0-6.fc36 fedora 105 k
cliquer-libs x86_64 1.22-3.fc36 fedora 38 k
coin-or-Cbc x86_64 2.10.5-8.fc36 fedora 828 k
coin-or-Cgl x86_64 0.60.3-6.fc36 fedora 429 k
coin-or-Clp x86_64 1.17.6-7.fc36 fedora 931 k
coin-or-CoinUtils x86_64 2.11.4-6.fc36 fedora 479 k
coin-or-Osi x86_64 0.108.6-5.fc36 fedora 319 k
colord-gtk4 x86_64 0.3.0-1.fc36 fedora 19 k
f36-backgrounds-base noarch 36.0.1-2.fc36 updates-testing 22 M
f36-backgrounds-gnome noarch 36.0.1-2.fc36 updates-testing 7.5 k
gecode x86_64 6.2.0-8.fc35 fedora 3.1 M
glpk x86_64 5.0-4.fc36 fedora 385 k
gnome-desktop4 x86_64 42~beta-3.fc36 fedora 148 k
google-noto-sans-vf-fonts noarch 20201206-9.fc36 updates-testing 492 k
gtksourceview5 x86_64 5.3.2-3.fc36 fedora 994 k
initscripts-rename-device x86_64 10.16-2.fc36 updates-testing 18 k
jacop noarch 4.8-7.fc36 fedora 1.7 M
java-17-openjdk-headless x86_64 1:17.0.2.0.8-7.fc36
fedora 40 M
javapackages-tools noarch 6.0.0-7.fc36 fedora 25 k
jline-builtins noarch 3.21.0-3.fc36 fedora 261 k
jline-reader noarch 3.21.0-3.fc36 fedora 170 k
jline-style noarch 3.21.0-3.fc36 fedora 35 k
jline-terminal noarch 3.21.0-3.fc36 fedora 281 k
jline-terminal-jna noarch 3.21.0-3.fc36 fedora 65 k
jna x86_64 5.10.0-3.fc36 fedora 281 k
kernel-core x86_64 5.17.0-0.rc7.116.fc36
fedora 46 M
laszip x86_64 3.4.3-7.fc36 fedora 153 k
libadwaita-qt6 x86_64 1.4.1-3.fc36 updates-testing 161 k
libffi3.1 x86_64 3.1-32.fc36 fedora 31 k
libgweather4 x86_64 3.99.0-1.fc36 updates-testing 3.0 M
liblas x86_64 1.8.1-19.gitd76a061.fc36
fedora 317 k
libnauty x86_64 2.7.3-2.fc36 fedora 596 k
libnma-gtk4 x86_64 1.8.34-1.fc36.1 fedora 115 k
libportal-gtk3 x86_64 0.5-2.fc36 fedora 17 k
libportal-gtk4 x86_64 0.5-2.fc36 fedora 17 k
libsoup3 x86_64 3.0.4-1.fc36 fedora 360 k
libxcvt x86_64 0.1.1-2.fc36 fedora 13 k
lilv-libs x86_64 0.24.12-4.fc36 updates-testing 58 k
lua-filesystem x86_64 1.8.0-6.fc36 fedora 34 k
lua-json noarch 1.3.2-19.fc36 fedora 26 k
lua-lpeg x86_64 1.0.2-8.fc36 fedora 67 k
lua-term x86_64 0.07-15.fc36 fedora 15 k
material-icons-fonts noarch 4.0.0-6.fc36 fedora 407 k
metis x86_64 5.1.0-32.fc36 fedora 574 k
mockito noarch 3.12.4-3.fc36 fedora 579 k
mozjs91 x86_64 91.7.0-1.fc36 updates-testing 4.3 M
mp x86_64 3.1.0-37.20200303git7fd4828.fc36
fedora 942 k
objectweb-asm noarch 9.2-3.fc36 fedora 369 k
objenesis noarch 3.1-9.fc36 fedora 107 k
opencv-contrib x86_64 4.5.5-5.fc36 fedora 4.6 M
openldap-compat x86_64 2.6.1-2.fc36 fedora 18 k
openslide x86_64 3.4.1-20.fc36 fedora 107 k
openssl1.1 x86_64 1:1.1.1l-2.fc36 fedora 1.5 M
opentest4j noarch 1.2.0-10.fc36 fedora 24 k
package-notes-srpm-macros noarch 0.4-14.fc36 fedora 11 k
pam-libs x86_64 1.5.2-12.fc36 updates-testing 59 k
scala noarch 2.13.7-3.fc36 fedora 10 M
scala-library noarch 2.13.7-3.fc36 fedora 5.0 M
scala-reflect noarch 2.13.7-3.fc36 fedora 3.3 M
scotch x86_64 6.1.2-2.fc36 fedora 388 k
vtk x86_64 9.1.0-6.fc36 fedora 22 M
Installing weak dependencies:
aardvark-dns x86_64 1.0.1-2.fc36 updates-testing 1.0 M
compat-ffmpeg4 x86_64 4.4.1-1.fc36 rpmfusion-free 7.6 M
juniversalchardet noarch 2.4.0-5.fc36 fedora 222 k
netavark x86_64 1.0.1-1.fc36 updates-testing 1.9 M
qgnomeplatform-qt6 x86_64 0.8.4-5.fc36 updates-testing 146 k
vmaf-models noarch 2.3.0-3.fc36 fedora 225 k
Removing:
kernel x86_64 5.16.9-200.fc35 @updates 0
kernel-core x86_64 5.16.9-200.fc35 @updates 87 M
kernel-modules x86_64 5.16.9-200.fc35 @updates 51 M
kernel-modules-extra x86_64 5.16.9-200.fc35 @updates 3.1 M
Downgrading:
gnome-user-docs noarch 41.1-2.fc36 fedora 8.5 M
libspnav x86_64 0.2.3-15.fc36 fedora 17 k
python3-cffi x86_64 1.15.0-2.fc36 fedora 244 k
python3-google-api-client noarch 2:2.37.0-1.fc36 fedora 2.7 M
python3-pikepdf x86_64 4.4.1-1.fc36 fedora 527 k
telegram-desktop x86_64 3.5.2-1.fc36 rpmfusion-free 27 M
thunderbird x86_64 91.4.0-1.fc36 fedora 96 M
thunderbird-librnp-rnp x86_64 91.4.0-1.fc36 fedora 1.0 M
Transaction Summary
================================================================================
Install 80 Packages
Upgrade 2190 Packages
Remove 4 Packages
Downgrade 8 Packages
Total download size: 3.2 G
Operation aborted.
The upgrade process seems successfull without noticeable issue.
--
Luya Tshimbalanga
Fedora Design Team
Fedora Design Suite maintainer
1:56 a.m.
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 18:43:01 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and
try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo --enablerepo=
updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
Didn't get any issues on my 3 F35 installations. 👏
--
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) |
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Time zone: Europe/London
2:29 a.m.
Am 11.03.2022 um 18:43 schrieb Miroslav Suchý
<msuchy(a)redhat.com>:
Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
Just for the records: no issue found with Fedora 35 Server Edition in its default
configuration including virtualisation
3:31 a.m.
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 06:43:01PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and try to run:
In case you hit dependency issues, please report it against the appropriate package.
Two problems, one with lilv:
Error:
Problem 1: lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.i686 has inferior architecture
- lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- problem with installed package lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.i686
Already reported at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2052588
The other one with obs/x264 from RPMFusion.
In general, great work!
--
Tomasz Torcz “God, root, what's the difference?”
tomek(a)pipebreaker.pl “God is more forgiving.”
12:39 p.m.
On Saturday, March 12, 2022 3:31:23 AM CST Tomasz Torcz wrote:
The other one with obs/x264 from RPMFusion.
I came across this same issue. Has anyone reported this issue to them?
For the record, here is the error message:
```
Error:
Problem: package obs-studio-27.2.1-1.fc36.x86_64 requires x264, but none of the providers
can be installed
- problem with installed package obs-studio-27.2.1-1.fc35.x86_64
- package x264-0.163-5.20210613git5db6aa6.fc36.x86_64 requires libgpac.so.10()(64bit),
but none of the providers can be installed
- x264-0.163-2.20210613git5db6aa6.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- obs-studio-27.2.1-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- gpac-libs-1.0.1-4.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
```
--
Thanks,
Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
Pronouns: He/Him/Him
3:21 p.m.
It's been ~1 month and I am still unable to upgrade to F36 due to the same issue with
lilv:
Error:
Problem: lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.i686 has inferior architecture
- lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.i686
Are there plans to fix this and/or is there a known workaround?
3:52 p.m.
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 08:21:11PM -0000, Tom Seewald wrote:
It's been ~1 month and I am still unable to upgrade to F36 due to
the same issue with lilv:
Error:
Problem: lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.i686 has inferior architecture
- lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.i686
Are there plans to fix this and/or is there a known workaround?
Does adding --allowerasing work?
kevin
8:58 p.m.
I'm getting:
Error:
Problem: lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.i686 has inferior architecture
- lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.i686
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
It looks like it has been built for f36 but it has no tags:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1859708
Thanks,
Richard
5:18 p.m.
There is a workaround - I ran into this due to running the RPM version of steam. I removed
the i686 lilv (which removed steam) and allowed me to complete the upgrade. After the
upgrade completed I reinstalled steam. All my games etc were still there; the f36 version
of the rpm does not require the 32 bit lilv and runs fine without it.
Marty
On Apr 12, 2022, at 3:21 PM, Tom Seewald <tseewald(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
It's been ~1 month and I am still unable to upgrade to F36 due to the same issue
with lilv:
Error:
Problem: lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.i686 has inferior architecture
- lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.i686
Are there plans to fix this and/or is there a known workaround?
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
3:32 a.m.
Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
Didn't get any issues on my F35 installations. 👏 as always good work.....
Thanks, Regards
--
Héctor Louzao "hhlp" (He / Him / His) |
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:hhlp
Time zone: Europe/Madrid
5:22 a.m.
There are some issues with Open Babel's dependencies:
Error:
Problem 1: package expo-1.18.11-1.fc28.x86_64 requires
libopenbabel.so.5()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- openbabel-libs-2.4.1-37.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a
distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package expo-1.18.11-1.fc28.x86_64
Problem 2: problem with installed package IQmol-2.15.0-5.fc35.x86_64
- package IQmol-2.15.0-5.fc35.x86_64 requires
libopenbabel.so.5()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- cannot install both openbabel-libs-3.1.1-6.fc36.x86_64 and
openbabel-libs-2.4.1-37.fc35.x86_64
- package ghemical-3.0.0-19.fc36.x86_64 requires
libopenbabel.so.7()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- problem with installed package ghemical-3.0.0-17.fc35.x86_64
- ghemical-3.0.0-17.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
5:23 a.m.
On Friday, 11 March 2022 17.43.01 WET Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and
try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \ --assumeno distro-sync
This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal
potential problems.
You may also run `dnf upgrade` before running this command.
The `--assumeno` will just test the transaction, but does not make the
actual
upgrade.
In case you hit dependency issues, please report it against the appropriate
package.
Or against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in
Fedora 36. Please check existing reports against
fedora-obsolete-packages first:
https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" (F36FailsToInstall)
reports:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?
bug_id=1992487&bug_id_type=anddependso
n&format=tvp&list_id=12486533
Thank you
Miroslav
This is what I get:
Error:
Problem: package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedcrypto.so.3()
(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedtls.so.12()(64bit), but
none of the providers can be installed
- package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedx509.so.0()(64bit), but
none of the providers can be installed
- problem with installed package julia-1.7.2-1.fc35.x86_64
- mbedtls-2.16.12-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- julia-1.7.2-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
--
José Abílio
8:15 a.m.
On Saturday, 12 March 2022 11.23.11 WET José Abílio Matos wrote:
Error:
Problem: package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires
libmbedcrypto.so.3()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed -
package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedtls.so.12()(64bit), but
none of the providers can be installed - package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64
requires libmbedx509.so.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be
installed - problem with installed package julia-1.7.2-1.fc35.x86_64
- mbedtls-2.16.12-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- julia-1.7.2-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
Replying to myself julia 1.7.2 is not available in Fedora 36+ only in Fedora
35.
Downgrading julia (that does back to 1.7.0beta4-1 the update still fails with:
Error:
Problem: package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedcrypto.so.3()
(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedtls.so.12()(64bit),
but none of the providers can be installed
- package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedx509.so.0()(64bit),
but none of the providers can be installed
- problem with installed package julia-1.7.0beta4-1.fc35.x86_64
- mbedtls-2.16.12-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- julia-1.7.0beta4-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
Finally removing julia it works:
...
Transaction Summary
==============================================
Install 74 Packages
Upgrade 8143 Packages
Remove 4 Packages
Downgrade 9 Packages
Total download size: 7.5 G
Operation aborted.
Interestingly one of the packages that will be downgraded is tellico, that I
have built, and where only F36 has the previous package while F34, F35 and F37
(rawhide) have the same version. So I failed to notice the branching of F36.
:-(
Fortunately the solution, in this case, is simple. :-)
--
José Abílio
9:20 a.m.
Dne 12. 03. 22 v 15:15 José Abílio Matos napsal(a):
On Saturday, 12 March 2022 11.23.11 WET José Abílio Matos wrote:
> Error:
> Problem: package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires
> libmbedcrypto.so.3()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed -
> package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedtls.so.12()(64bit), but
> none of the providers can be installed - package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64
> requires libmbedx509.so.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be
> installed - problem with installed package julia-1.7.2-1.fc35.x86_64
> - mbedtls-2.16.12-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
> - julia-1.7.2-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
Replying to myself julia 1.7.2 is not available in Fedora 36+ only in Fedora 35.
This is an excelent example of package and issue which should be reported to
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedora-obsolete-packages/
Can you please report it there?
Miroslav
9:35 a.m.
On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 3:20 PM Miroslav Suchý <msuchy(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Dne 12. 03. 22 v 15:15 José Abílio Matos napsal(a):
On Saturday, 12 March 2022 11.23.11 WET José Abílio Matos wrote:
> Error:
> Problem: package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires
> libmbedcrypto.so.3()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed -
> package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedtls.so.12()(64bit),
but
> none of the providers can be installed - package
julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64
> requires libmbedx509.so.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be
> installed - problem with installed package julia-1.7.2-1.fc35.x86_64
> - mbedtls-2.16.12-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
> - julia-1.7.2-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
Replying to myself julia 1.7.2 is not available in Fedora 36+ only in
Fedora 35.
This is an excelent example of package and issue which should be reported
to
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedora-obsolete-packages/
Can you please report it there?
Why are you suggesting reporting it to fedora-obsolete-packages? The Julia
package is not obsolete, and the maintainers are acutely aware of the
install problem and are tracking it in the appropriate FTBFS/FTI bugzilla
entries (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2045732,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2044284), but they need
upstream input on the fixes in order to get it working. Considering this an
obsolete package just because it has this install error right now is in my
opinion very short-sighted.
-Ian
Miroslav
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
11:26 a.m.
On Saturday, 12 March 2022 15.35.02 WET Ian McInerney via devel wrote:
Why are you suggesting reporting it to fedora-obsolete-packages? The
Julia
package is not obsolete, and the maintainers are acutely aware of the
install
problem and are tracking it in the appropriate FTBFS/FTI bugzilla entries
(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2045732,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2044284), but they need upstream
input on the fixes in order to get it working. Considering this an obsolete
package just because it has this install error right now is in my opinion
very short-sighted.
-Ian
Ian, I think that it was my message that induced Miroslav into mistake.
I can see how it can be read that way.
What I should have said is that the version available in F35 is newer than
that available in F36+.
Mea culpa. :-)
--
José Abílio
1:54 p.m.
On 3/11/22 12:43, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal potential
problems.
You may also run `dnf upgrade` before running this command.
The `--assumeno` will just test the transaction, but does not make the actual upgrade.
In case you hit dependency issues, please report it against the appropriate package.
Or against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in Fedora 36.
Please check existing reports against
fedora-obsolete-packages first:
https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" (F36FailsToInstall)
reports:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_id=1992487&bug_id_type=an...
Thank you
Miroslav
It tries to downgrade Thunderbird, which is a bad idea for obvious security reasons.
--
Sincerely,
Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)
2:01 p.m.
I just tried it myself, the only dependency errors I got was from VS Code
(Dotnet package dependency errors, I use MS's repos so I'd prolly have to
upgrade it or remove it temporarily) and OpenRGB (Which I don't really use).
So pretty much good on my end!
Le ven. 11 mars 2022, à 12 h 43, Miroslav Suchý <msuchy(a)redhat.com> a
écrit :
Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time
and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal
potential problems.
You may also run `dnf upgrade` before running this command.
The `--assumeno` will just test the transaction, but does not make the
actual upgrade.
In case you hit dependency issues, please report it against the
appropriate package.
Or against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in
Fedora 36. Please check existing reports against
fedora-obsolete-packages first:
https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" (F36FailsToInstall)
reports:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_id=1992487&bug_id_type=an...
Thank you
Miroslav
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
7:53 p.m.
| # Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
| # next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
| sudo dnf module reset '*'
|
| dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
| --enablerepo=updates-testing \
| $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
| --assumeno distro-sync
I ran it on mine and had no issues.
Transaction Summary
======================================================================================================================================
Install 47 Packages
Upgrade 2806 Packages
Remove 7 Packages
Downgrade 6 Packages
Total download size: 2.9 G
Operation aborted.
Excellent work!
Harish
--
Harish Pillay 9v1hp hpillay(a)redhat.com +65.9636.9253 gpg id: 0x746809E3
10:39 p.m.
On 3/12/22 04:43, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
For me the only error I received was:
Error:
Problem: package VirtualBox-6.1-6.1.32_149290_fedora33-1.x86_64
requires libvpx.so.6()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- libvpx-1.10.0-2.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package
VirtualBox-6.1-6.1.32_149290_fedora33-1.x86_64
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
--
Ian Laurie
ilaurie(a)bigpond.net.au
3:14 a.m.
I have the following errors:
Error:
Problem 1: package avogadro-libs-1.2.0-35.fc35.x86_64 requires libGLEW.so.2.1()(64bit),
but none of the providers can be installed
- libGLEW-2.1.0-10.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package avogadro-libs-1.2.0-35.fc35.x86_64
Problem 2: package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedcrypto.so.3()(64bit), but
none of the providers can be installed
- package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedtls.so.12()(64bit), but none of
the providers can be installed
- package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedx509.so.0()(64bit), but none of
the providers can be installed
- problem with installed package julia-1.7.2-1.fc35.x86_64
- mbedtls-2.16.12-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- julia-1.7.2-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
On 14/03/2022 5:39, Ian Laurie <ilaurie(a)bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> On 3/12/22 04:43, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> >
> > dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
> > --enablerepo=updates-testing \
> > $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
> > --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
> > --assumeno distro-sync
>
> For me the only error I received was:
>
> Error:
> Problem: package VirtualBox-6.1-6.1.32_149290_fedora33-1.x86_64
> requires libvpx.so.6()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
> - libvpx-1.10.0-2.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
> repository
> - problem with installed package
> VirtualBox-6.1-6.1.32_149290_fedora33-1.x86_64
> (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
>
>
>
4:49 a.m.
On 3/14/22 19:15, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 14/03/2022 04:39, Ian Laurie wrote:
> Problem: package VirtualBox-6.1-6.1.32_149290_fedora33-1.x86_64
> requires libvpx.so.6()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
Use VirtualBox from the RPM Fusion repository.
Yeah I'm thinking I should, and not just because of this. Mainly for
on-time kernel support.
--
Ian Laurie
FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser
TZ: Australia/Sydney
4:55 a.m.
On 14/03/2022 10:49, Ian Laurie wrote:
Yeah I'm thinking I should, and not just because of this. Mainly
for
on-time kernel support.
Also, since Fedora 36 the NVIDIA and VirtualBox kmods can be
automatically signed after the build to support UEFI Secure Boot.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vitaly(a)easycoding.org)
5:01 a.m.
On 3/14/22 20:55, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 14/03/2022 10:49, Ian Laurie wrote:
> Yeah I'm thinking I should, and not just because of this. Mainly for
> on-time kernel support.
Also, since Fedora 36 the NVIDIA and VirtualBox kmods can be
automatically signed after the build to support UEFI Secure Boot.
Yup. Consider it done.
--
Ian Laurie
FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser
TZ: Australia/Sydney
7:25 p.m.
On 3/14/22 20:55, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 14/03/2022 10:49, Ian Laurie wrote:
> Yeah I'm thinking I should, and not just because of this. Mainly for
> on-time kernel support.
Also, since Fedora 36 the NVIDIA and VirtualBox kmods can be
automatically signed after the build to support UEFI Secure Boot.
I decided to go for it on my server/workstation at work and upgrade to
36 (after moving to RPMFusion's VirtualBox).
Sadly it's not able to boot graphically, but I think the issue is with
my RPMFusion NVIDIA drivers. I can login fine to a virtual console
however, and lightdm is running, just not working. The startx command
also fails.
If I boot my last fc35 kernel-5.16.14-200.fc35.x86_64 everything works
with the GUI..
Welcome to zuke
Running Fedora release 36 (Thirty Six)
kernel-5.16.14-200.fc35.x86_64 #1 SMP PREEMPT Fri Mar 11 20:31:18 UTC 2022
zuke$ rpm -qa | grep nvidia
kmod-nvidia-470xx-5.16.10-200.fc35.x86_64-470.103.01-1.fc35.x86_64
kmod-nvidia-470xx-5.16.11-200.fc35.x86_64-470.103.01-1.fc35.x86_64
kmod-nvidia-470xx-5.16.12-200.fc35.x86_64-470.103.01-1.fc35.x86_64
kmod-nvidia-470xx-5.16.13-200.fc35.x86_64-470.103.01-1.fc35.x86_64
xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-470xx-kmodsrc-470.103.01-3.fc36.x86_64
xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-470xx-libs-470.103.01-3.fc36.x86_64
akmod-nvidia-470xx-470.103.01-2.fc36.x86_64
nvidia-settings-470xx-470.103.01-2.fc36.x86_64
xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-470xx-470.103.01-3.fc36.x86_64
kmod-nvidia-470xx-5.17.0-0.rc7.116.fc36.x86_64-470.103.01-2.fc36.x86_64
kmod-nvidia-470xx-5.16.14-200.fc35.x86_64-470.103.01-2.fc36.x86_64
zuke$
--
Ian Laurie
FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser
TZ: Australia/Sydney
8:20 p.m.
On 3/15/22 11:25, Ian Laurie wrote:
On 3/14/22 20:55, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 14/03/2022 10:49, Ian Laurie wrote:
>> Yeah I'm thinking I should, and not just because of this. Mainly
>> for on-time kernel support.
>
> Also, since Fedora 36 the NVIDIA and VirtualBox kmods can be
> automatically signed after the build to support UEFI Secure Boot.
>
I decided to go for it on my server/workstation at work and upgrade to
36 (after moving to RPMFusion's VirtualBox).
Sadly it's not able to boot graphically, but I think the issue is with
my RPMFusion NVIDIA drivers. I can login fine to a virtual console
however, and lightdm is running, just not working. The startx command
also fails.
If I boot my last fc35 kernel-5.16.14-200.fc35.x86_64 everything works
with the GUI..
Getting rid of the NVIDIA stuff has fixed things for now, I can boot
graphically with the fc36 kernel.
--
Ian Laurie
FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser
TZ: Australia/Sydney
9:13 a.m.
On 15/03/2022 01:25, Ian Laurie wrote:
Sadly it's not able to boot graphically, but I think the issue is
with
my RPMFusion NVIDIA drivers. I can login fine to a virtual console
however, and lightdm is running, just not working. The startx command
also fails.
1. You need to disable UEFI Secure Boot or configure akmods to
automatically sign all built kmods (no documentation available yet).
2. On 470xx drivers branch you must disable Wayland on GDM (Fedora 36
system-wide change). NVIDIA support Wayland only on 495.xx branch or newer.
As an 470.xx NVIDIA drivers maintainer, I think I should disable Wayland
support on our side during the package installation.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vitaly(a)easycoding.org)
5:29 p.m.
On 3/16/22 01:13, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 15/03/2022 01:25, Ian Laurie wrote:
> Sadly it's not able to boot graphically, but I think the issue is
> with my RPMFusion NVIDIA drivers. I can login fine to a virtual
> console however, and lightdm is running, just not working. The
> startx command also fails.
1. You need to disable UEFI Secure Boot or configure akmods to
automatically sign all built kmods (no documentation available yet).
2. On 470xx drivers branch you must disable Wayland on GDM (Fedora 36
system-wide change). NVIDIA support Wayland only on 495.xx branch or
newer.
As an 470.xx NVIDIA drivers maintainer, I think I should disable
Wayland support on our side during the package installation.
Thanks for that info. I'm running Xfce so I have lightdm not gdm. In
my case it was UEFI enabled in the BIOS, but this would have been the
case with fc35 as well so I'm a bit perplexed why previously with Fedora
35 it "appeared" to work but failed miserably in Fedora 36. Also after
the upgrade to 36, I was able to get graphics by booting the last 35 kernel.
Maybe the NVIDIA drivers were never working as such before, but somehow
it was gracefully "falling back" to default drivers with the old kernel
but not the new one? No idea what was happening.
--
Ian Laurie
FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser
TZ: Australia/Sydney
6:18 a.m.
On 15/03/2022 23:29, Ian Laurie wrote:
Maybe the NVIDIA drivers were never working as such before, but
somehow
it was gracefully "falling back" to default drivers with the old kernel
but not the new one?
Enabled Secure Boot prevents the Linux kernel from loading all unsigned
kernel modules such as NVIDIA drivers.
You can check old logs with journalctl --list-boots.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vitaly(a)easycoding.org)
3:17 a.m.
Hey!
Have a hospital visit and some other stuff in 14 minutes, but will help to
do some testing when i get back home or later during the week
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 6:43 PM Miroslav Suchý <msuchy(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time
and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal
potential problems.
You may also run `dnf upgrade` before running this command.
The `--assumeno` will just test the transaction, but does not make the
actual upgrade.
In case you hit dependency issues, please report it against the
appropriate package.
Or against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in
Fedora 36. Please check existing reports against
fedora-obsolete-packages first:
https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" (F36FailsToInstall)
reports:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_id=1992487&bug_id_type=an...
Thank you
Miroslav
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
8:09 a.m.
Hey!
Had some spare cycles now, when eating lunch this afternoon, and other then
tracker-miners and tracker-extract-3 crashing in Virtualbox VM and on an HP
655 laptop it seems to work as intended for me with an update from
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/live-respins/F35-WORK-x86_64-LIVE-20...
to the latest F36 Alpha using the sudo dnf system-upgrade download
--releasever=36 method as described here:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/dnf-system-upgrade/
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 9:17 AM Luna Jernberg <droidbittin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hey!
Have a hospital visit and some other stuff in 14 minutes, but will help to
do some testing when i get back home or later during the week
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 6:43 PM Miroslav Suchý <msuchy(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time
> and try to run:
>
> # Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
> # next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
> sudo dnf module reset '*'
>
> dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
> --enablerepo=updates-testing \
> $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
> --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
> --assumeno distro-sync
>
>
> This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal
> potential problems.
>
> You may also run `dnf upgrade` before running this command.
>
> The `--assumeno` will just test the transaction, but does not make the
> actual upgrade.
>
>
> In case you hit dependency issues, please report it against the
> appropriate package.
>
> Or against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in
> Fedora 36. Please check existing reports against
>
> fedora-obsolete-packages first:
>
> https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
>
> and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" (F36FailsToInstall)
> reports:
>
>
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_id=1992487&bug_id_type=an...
>
> Thank you
> Miroslav
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
5:25 a.m.
Upgrade tested from fedora 34 test system:
Error:
Problem 1: package python3-argh-0.26.1-19.fc34.noarch requires python(abi) = 3.9, but
none of the providers can be installed
- python3-3.9.10-1.fc34.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package python3-argh-0.26.1-19.fc34.noarch
Problem 2: package python3-pipreqs-0.4.10-2.fc34.noarch requires python3.9dist(docopt),
but none of the providers can be installed
- python3-docopt-0.6.2-19.fc34.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package python3-pipreqs-0.4.10-2.fc34.noarch
Problem 3: package python3-plette-0.2.3-1.fc34.noarch requires python3.9dist(six), but
none of the providers can be installed
- python3-six-1.15.0-5.fc34.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package python3-plette-0.2.3-1.fc34.noarch
Problem 4: package python3-yarg-0.1.9-14.fc34.noarch requires python3.9dist(requests),
but none of the providers can be installed
- python3-requests-2.25.1-1.fc34.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package python3-yarg-0.1.9-14.fc34.noarch
Problem 5: package tepl-6.00.0-1.fc34.x86_64 requires libicui18n.so.67()(64bit), but none
of the providers can be installed
- package tepl-6.00.0-1.fc34.x86_64 requires libicuuc.so.67()(64bit), but none of the
providers can be installed
- libicu-67.1-7.fc34.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package tepl-6.00.0-1.fc34.x86_64
Problem 6: package python3-3.9.10-1.fc34.x86_64 requires python3-libs(x86-64) =
3.9.10-1.fc34, but none of the providers can be installed
- package python3-first-2.0.2-2.fc34.noarch requires python(abi) = 3.9, but none of the
providers can be installed
- python3-libs-3.9.10-1.fc34.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package python3-first-2.0.2-2.fc34.noarch
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Regards
Sven Kieske
Systementwickler / systems engineer
Mittwald CM Service GmbH & Co. KG
Königsberger Straße 4-6
32339 Espelkamp
Tel.: 05772 / 293-900
Fax: 05772 / 293-333
https://www.mittwald.de
Geschäftsführer: Robert Meyer, Florian Jürgens
St.Nr.: 331/5721/1033, USt-IdNr.: DE814773217, HRA 6640, AG Bad Oeynhausen
Komplementärin: Robert Meyer Verwaltungs GmbH, HRB 13260, AG Bad Oeynhausen
Informationen zur Datenverarbeitung im Rahmen unserer Geschäftstätigkeit
gemäß Art. 13-14 DSGVO sind unter www.mittwald.de/ds abrufbar.
7:27 a.m.
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 17:43, Miroslav Suchý <msuchy(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time
and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
Looks good to me
$ sudo dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36
--enablerepo=updates-testing $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null &&
echo --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) --assumeno distro-sync
Docker CE Stable - x86_64
787 B/s | 384 B 00:00
Errors during downloading metadata for repository 'docker-ce-stable':
- Status code: 404 for
https://download.docker.com/linux/fedora/36/x86_64/stable/repodata/repomd...
(IP: 13.227.150.66)
Error: Failed to download metadata for repo 'docker-ce-stable': Cannot
download repomd.xml: Cannot download repodata/repomd.xml: All mirrors were
tried
Fedora 36 - x86_64
4.1 MB/s | 80 MB 00:19
Fedora 36 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64
4.3 kB/s | 2.5 kB 00:00
Fedora Modular 36 - x86_64
2.1 MB/s | 2.3 MB 00:01
Fedora 36 - x86_64 - Updates
536 B/s | 257 B 00:00
Fedora Modular 36 - x86_64 - Updates
896 B/s | 257 B 00:00
Fedora 36 - x86_64 - Test Updates
3.6 MB/s | 8.6 MB 00:02
Fedora Modular 36 - x86_64 - Test Updates
354 kB/s | 319 kB 00:00
Hashicorp Stable - x86_64
1.5 kB/s | 378 B 00:00
Errors during downloading metadata for repository 'hashicorp':
- Status code: 404 for
https://rpm.releases.hashicorp.com/fedora/36/x86_64/stable/repodata/repom...
(IP: 151.101.62.49)
Error: Failed to download metadata for repo 'hashicorp': Cannot download
repomd.xml: Cannot download repodata/repomd.xml: All mirrors were tried
RPM Fusion for Fedora 36 - Free
2.0 MB/s | 949 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 36 - Free - Updates
1.0 kB/s | 257 B 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 36 - Nonfree
525 kB/s | 249 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 36 - Nonfree - Updates
1.3 kB/s | 257 B 00:00
Ignoring repositories: docker-ce-stable, hashicorp
Dependencies resolved.
===============================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================
Package
Architecture Version
Repository
Size
===============================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================
Installing:
...
pam-libs
x86_64 1.5.2-12.fc36
updates-testing 59 k
Installing weak dependencies:
rsyslog-logrotate
x86_64 8.2102.0-10.fc36
fedora
9.9 k
vmaf-models
noarch 2.3.0-3.fc36
fedora
225 k
zstd
x86_64 1.5.2-1.fc36
fedora
449 k
Removing:
kernel
x86_64 5.16.11-200.fc35
@updates
0
kernel-core
x86_64 5.16.11-200.fc35
@updates
87 M
kernel-devel
x86_64 5.16.11-200.fc35
@updates
62 M
kernel-modules
x86_64 5.16.11-200.fc35
@updates
51 M
kernel-modules-extra
x86_64 5.16.11-200.fc35
@updates
3.1 M
Downgrading:
python3-cffi
x86_64 1.15.0-2.fc36
fedora
244 k
Transaction Summary
===============================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================
Install 33 Packages
Upgrade 1797 Packages
Remove 5 Packages
Downgrade 1 Package
Total download size: 2.0 G
Operation aborted.
--
"Never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in
except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never
yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.''
Winston Churchill
https://stackoverflow.com/users/3670118/casep
5:29 p.m.
Works widely fine with me.
But some downgrades in dnf:
Downgrading:
python3-cffi x86_64 1.15.0-2.fc36
fedora 244 k
thunderbird x86_64 91*.4*.0-1.fc36
fedora 96 M
thunderbird-librnp-rnp x86_64 91*.4*.0-1.fc36
fedora 1.0 M
In Fedora 35, thunderbird & thunderbird-librnp-rnp are currently at
91*.6*.2-1.fc35. So this would be really a downgrade. I assume this is
not intended.
python3-cffi is just another build of the same version (1.15.0-2.fc36
<-> 1.15.0-4.fc35).
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 17:43, Miroslav Suchý
<msuchy(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of
your time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be
enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
7:45 a.m.
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 11:43 AM Miroslav Suchý <msuchy(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time
and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
I didn't run and upgrade/update first but I don't think it would affect
this problem:
Error:
Problem 1: lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.i686 has inferior architecture
- lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package lilv-0.24.10-4.fc35.i686
Problem 2: package openrgb-0.6-1.fc34.x86_64 requires
libmbedcrypto.so.3()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package openrgb-0.6-1.fc34.x86_64 requires libmbedtls.so.12()(64bit),
but none of the providers can be installed
- package openrgb-0.6-1.fc34.x86_64 requires libmbedx509.so.0()(64bit),
but none of the providers can be installed
- mbedtls-2.16.12-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
- problem with installed package openrgb-0.6-1.fc34.x86_64
The first problem is related to steam from RPM Fusion.
Second problem, looks like openrgb needs to be rebuilt?
Thanks,
Richard
10:40 a.m.
On my F35 machine, there are no transaction errors, but the following packages get
downgraded:
- binutils-x86_64-linux-gnu and cross-binutils-common - from 2.37-3.fc35 to 2.37-2.fc36
(same version, release downgrade)
- thunderbird and thunderbird-librnp-rnp - from 91.5.0-1.fc35 to 91.4.0-1.fc36 (version
downgrade)
On my second machine that's still running F34, I got the following transaction error:
Problem 1: package python3-argh-0.26.1-19.fc34.noarch requires python(abi) = 3.9, but
none of the providers can be installed
- python3-3.9.10-1.fc34.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package python3-argh-0.26.1-19.fc34.noarch
Problem 2: package tepl-6.00.0-1.fc34.x86_64 requires libicui18n.so.67()(64bit), but none
of the providers can be installed
- package tepl-6.00.0-1.fc34.x86_64 requires libicuuc.so.67()(64bit), but none of the
providers can be installed
- libicu-67.1-7.fc34.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
- problem with installed package tepl-6.00.0-1.fc34.x86_64
A.FI.
3:31 a.m.
On 3/12/22 04:43, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and try to run:
I've done 2 upgrades from 35 -> 36 (real, not tests) on native systems.
On one, as explained earlier in this thread , I had to migrate
VirtualBox from the Oracle version to the RPM Fusion version, and also
ditch the RPM Fusion NVIDIA drivers which were preventing a boot to a
graphical greeter (and also breaking the startx command), presumably
because of a comparability issue with the 5.17 kernel.
On the second system it just worked without fiddling. The systems were
as follows:
[1] Dell Precision T5610 2 x Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2603 v2 @ 1.80GHz
(8 cores total)
NVIDIA Corporation GK104 [GeForce GTX 760] (rev a1)
[2] Dell Optiplex 3040 1 x Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-6100T CPU @ 3.20GHz
Intel Corporation HD Graphics 530 (rev 06)
Both systems are relatively legacy unfortunately, but still looking good
here.
--
Ian Laurie
FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser
TZ: Australia/Sydney
4:39 a.m.
On Friday, 11 March 2022 at 18:43, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal potential
problems.
I tried dnf system-upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --releasever=36
(I have no modular packages installed and modular repos are disabled)
The upgrade goes smoothly with only three downgrades:
Downgrading:
python3-cffi x86_64 1.15.0-2.fc36 fedora 244 k
thunderbird x86_64 91.4.0-1.fc36 fedora 96 M
thunderbird-librnp-rnp x86_64 91.4.0-1.fc36 fedora 1.0 M
...
Transaction Summary
======================================================================
Install 61 Packages
Upgrade 1681 Packages
Remove 3 Packages
Downgrade 3 Packages
Some unnecessary weak dependencies get installed, but that's a personal
preference.
Regards,
Dominik
--
Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
752
days inactive
785
days old
40 comments
26 participants
participants (26)
-
Alexander Ploumistos -
Ankur Sinha -
Artur Frenszek-Iwicki -
Carlos "casep" Sepulveda -
Demi Marie Obenour -
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski -
Harish Pillay -
hhlp -
Ian Laurie -
Ian McInerney -
José Abílio Matos -
Kevin Fenzi -
Luna Jernberg -
Luya Tshimbalanga -
mark.e.fuller＠gmx.de -
Martin Jackson -
Maxwell G -
Miroslav Suchý -
Peter Boy -
py0xc3 -
Richard Shaw -
Steve Cossette -
Sven Kieske -
Tom Seewald -
Tomasz Torcz -
Vitaly Zaitsev