8:30 a.m.
One upgrade to F23 succeeded. The second server fails, repeatedly with
"dnf system-upgrade --releasever 23 download" resulting in:
…
[SKIPPED] zukitwo-gtk3-theme-0.0.2-1.fc23.noarch.rpm: Already
downloaded
[SKIPPED] zukitwo-gtk2-theme-0.0.2-1.fc23.noarch.rpm: Already
downloaded
warning: /var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade/kernel-core-4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64.rpm:
Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID 34ec9cba: NOKEY
Curl error (37): Couldn't read a file:// file for file:///etc/pki/rpm-
gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64 [Couldn't open file /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-
KEY-fedora-x86_64]
The downloaded packages were saved in cache till the next successful
transaction.
You can remove cached packages by executing 'dnf clean packages'.
Googling around doesn't find anything useful.
11:29 a.m.
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 6:30 AM, Sam Varshavchik <mrsam(a)courier-mta.com>
wrote:
One upgrade to F23 succeeded. The second server fails, repeatedly
with
"dnf system-upgrade --releasever 23 download" resulting in:
…
[SKIPPED] zukitwo-gtk3-theme-0.0.2-1.fc23.noarch.rpm: Already downloaded
[SKIPPED] zukitwo-gtk2-theme-0.0.2-1.fc23.noarch.rpm: Already downloaded
warning:
/var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade/kernel-core-4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64.rpm: Header
V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID 34ec9cba: NOKEY
Curl error (37): Couldn't read a file:// file for
file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64 [Couldn't open file
/etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64]
The downloaded packages were saved in cache till the next successful
transaction.
You can remove cached packages by executing 'dnf clean packages'.
I'm getting this exact same Curl error (37) trying to do a dnf
system-upgrade.
Except my warning is about libgudev-230-2.fc23.x86_64.rpm instead
of kernel-core-4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64.rpm as above.
Does anyone have a fix??
11:42 a.m.
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Robert Arkiletian <robark(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 6:30 AM, Sam Varshavchik <mrsam(a)courier-mta.com>
wrote:
> One upgrade to F23 succeeded. The second server fails, repeatedly with
> "dnf system-upgrade --releasever 23 download" resulting in:
>
> …
> [SKIPPED] zukitwo-gtk3-theme-0.0.2-1.fc23.noarch.rpm: Already downloaded
> [SKIPPED] zukitwo-gtk2-theme-0.0.2-1.fc23.noarch.rpm: Already downloaded
> warning:
> /var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade/kernel-core-4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64.rpm: Header
> V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID 34ec9cba: NOKEY
> Curl error (37): Couldn't read a file:// file for
> file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64 [Couldn't open file
> /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64]
> The downloaded packages were saved in cache till the next successful
> transaction.
> You can remove cached packages by executing 'dnf clean packages'.
>
I'm getting this exact same Curl error (37) trying to do a dnf
system-upgrade.
Except my warning is about libgudev-230-2.fc23.x86_64.rpm instead
of kernel-core-4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64.rpm as above.
Does anyone have a fix??
going from f21 to f23
# dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=23
...
[SKIPPED] yum-utils-1.1.31-508.fc23.noarch.rpm: Already downloaded
[SKIPPED] zenity-3.18.1.1-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm: Already downloaded
warning: /var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade/libgudev-230-2.fc23.x86_64.rpm: Header
V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID 34ec9cba: NOKEY
Curl error (37): Couldn't read a file:// file for
file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64 [Couldn't open file
/etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64]
11:54 a.m.
On 12/18/2015 09:42 AM, Robert Arkiletian wrote:
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks(a)alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- Heisenberg _may_ have slept here -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Robert Arkiletian
<robark(a)gmail.com
<mailto:robark@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 6:30 AM, Sam Varshavchik
<mrsam(a)courier-mta.com <mailto:mrsam@courier-mta.com>> wrote:
One upgrade to F23 succeeded. The second server fails,
repeatedly with
"dnf system-upgrade --releasever 23 download" resulting in:
…
[SKIPPED] zukitwo-gtk3-theme-0.0.2-1.fc23.noarch.rpm: Already
downloaded
[SKIPPED] zukitwo-gtk2-theme-0.0.2-1.fc23.noarch.rpm: Already
downloaded
warning:
/var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade/kernel-core-4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64.rpm:
Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID 34ec9cba: NOKEY
Curl error (37): Couldn't read a file:// file for
file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64 [Couldn't open
file /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64]
The downloaded packages were saved in cache till the next
successful transaction.
You can remove cached packages by executing 'dnf clean packages'.
I'm getting this exact same Curl error (37) trying to do a dnf
system-upgrade.
Except my warning is about libgudev-230-2.fc23.x86_64.rpm instead
of kernel-core-4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64.rpm as above.
Does anyone have a fix??
going from f21 to f23
# dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=23
...
[SKIPPED] yum-utils-1.1.31-508.fc23.noarch.rpm: Already downloaded
[SKIPPED] zenity-3.18.1.1-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm: Already downloaded
warning: /var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade/libgudev-230-2.fc23.x86_64.rpm:
Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID 34ec9cba: NOKEY
Curl error (37): Couldn't read a file:// file for
file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64 [Couldn't open file
/etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64]
Looks like a bug in the packaging of those RPMs. They should be
specifying:
file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-23-x86_64
which is a symlink to:
/etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-23-primary
(at least on my system it is). I'd bugzilla those RPMs (the libgudev and
kernel-core RPMs).
12:09 p.m.
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Rick Stevens <ricks(a)alldigital.com> wrote:
On 12/18/2015 09:42 AM, Robert Arkiletian wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Robert Arkiletian <robark(a)gmail.com
> <mailto:robark@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 6:30 AM, Sam Varshavchik
> <mrsam(a)courier-mta.com <mailto:mrsam@courier-mta.com>> wrote:
>
> One upgrade to F23 succeeded. The second server fails,
> repeatedly with
> "dnf system-upgrade --releasever 23 download" resulting in:
>
> …
> [SKIPPED] zukitwo-gtk3-theme-0.0.2-1.fc23.noarch.rpm: Already
> downloaded
> [SKIPPED] zukitwo-gtk2-theme-0.0.2-1.fc23.noarch.rpm: Already
> downloaded
> warning:
> /var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade/kernel-core-4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64.rpm:
> Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID 34ec9cba: NOKEY
> Curl error (37): Couldn't read a file:// file for
> file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64 [Couldn't open
> file /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64]
> The downloaded packages were saved in cache till the next
> successful transaction.
> You can remove cached packages by executing 'dnf clean packages'.
>
>
> I'm getting this exact same Curl error (37) trying to do a dnf
> system-upgrade.
>
> Except my warning is about libgudev-230-2.fc23.x86_64.rpm instead
> of kernel-core-4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64.rpm as above.
>
> Does anyone have a fix??
>
>
> going from f21 to f23
>
> # dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=23
> ...
> [SKIPPED] yum-utils-1.1.31-508.fc23.noarch.rpm: Already downloaded
> [SKIPPED] zenity-3.18.1.1-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm: Already downloaded
> warning: /var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade/libgudev-230-2.fc23.x86_64.rpm:
> Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID 34ec9cba: NOKEY
> Curl error (37): Couldn't read a file:// file for
> file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64 [Couldn't open file
> /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64]
>
Looks like a bug in the packaging of those RPMs. They should be
specifying:
file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-23-x86_64
which is a symlink to:
/etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-23-primary
(at least on my system it is). I'd bugzilla those RPMs (the libgudev and
kernel-core RPMs).
>
>
Is there a workaround?
2:06 p.m.
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Rick Stevens <ricks(a)alldigital.com> wrote:
file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-23-x86_64
which is a symlink to:
/etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-23-primary
I have run into the situation where this symlink still points to the wrong
place, which would cause any of the RPMs to fail the check. Look to see if
the symlink is actually pointing where it should. I've also seen it try to
use /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64, so check to see that this
one points to the correct Fedora version's key.
There are clearly some bugs in dnf system-upgrade where setting up the GPG
keys isn't done correctly.
--Greg
2:34 p.m.
On 12/18/2015 12:06 PM, Greg Woods wrote:
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Rick Stevens <ricks(a)alldigital.com
<mailto:ricks@alldigital.com>> wrote:
file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-23-x86_64
which is a symlink to:
/etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-23-primary
I have run into the situation where this symlink still points to the
wrong place, which would cause any of the RPMs to fail the check. Look
to see if the symlink is actually pointing where it should. I've also
seen it try to use /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64, so check
to see that this one points to the correct Fedora version's key.
There are clearly some bugs in dnf system-upgrade where setting up the
GPG keys isn't done correctly.
That's an issue, but what was scary to me was that the RPM was
referencing a file or symlink that did NOT have the Fedora version
in it--just "fedora-x86_64" rather than "fedora-23-x86_64". Something
like a kernel that doesn't specify the version is a BAD thing (IMHO).
In other words, I don't think this is a dnf issue, but rather an RPM
packaging error (at least in these two cases).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks(a)alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- 500: Internal Fortune Cookie Error -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3:38 p.m.
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Rick Stevens <ricks(a)alldigital.com> wrote:
On 12/18/2015 12:06 PM, Greg Woods wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Rick Stevens <ricks(a)alldigital.com
> <mailto:ricks@alldigital.com>> wrote:
>
> file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-23-x86_64
>
> which is a symlink to:
>
> /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-23-primary
>
>
> I have run into the situation where this symlink still points to the
> wrong place, which would cause any of the RPMs to fail the check. Look
> to see if the symlink is actually pointing where it should. I've also
> seen it try to use /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64, so check
> to see that this one points to the correct Fedora version's key.
>
> There are clearly some bugs in dnf system-upgrade where setting up the
> GPG keys isn't done correctly.
>
That's an issue, but what was scary to me was that the RPM was
referencing a file or symlink that did NOT have the Fedora version
in it--just "fedora-x86_64" rather than "fedora-23-x86_64".
Something
like a kernel that doesn't specify the version is a BAD thing (IMHO).
In other words, I don't think this is a dnf issue, but rather an RPM
packaging error (at least in these two cases).
easy workaround was --nogpgcheck option of dnf
5:51 p.m.
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 12:34:35 -0800
Rick Stevens <ricks(a)alldigital.com> wrote:
That's an issue, but what was scary to me was that the RPM was
referencing a file or symlink that did NOT have the Fedora version
in it--just "fedora-x86_64" rather than "fedora-23-x86_64".
Something
like a kernel that doesn't specify the version is a BAD thing (IMHO).
In other words, I don't think this is a dnf issue, but rather an RPM
packaging error (at least in these two cases).
Well, packages have no concept of this. It's the repo files that tell
dnf where to look for the keys for all packages in that repo:
Look at:
/etc/yum.repos.d/fedora.repo
(In the os you are upgrading from).
Most likely the fedora 21 install was using a old fedora-repos package
that didn't have the version in the key lines. This was fixed in
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-15683
but that was only an update 3 months ago, so you could have missed
updating to it.
kevin
6:01 p.m.
Robert Arkiletian writes:
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 6:30 AM, Sam Varshavchik
<<URL:mailto:mrsam@courier-
mta.com>mrsam(a)courier-mta.com> wrote:
One upgrade to F23 succeeded. The second server fails, repeatedly with
"dnf system-upgrade --releasever 23 download" resulting in:
…
[SKIPPED] zukitwo-gtk3-theme-0.0.2-1.fc23.noarch.rpm: Already downloaded
[SKIPPED] zukitwo-gtk2-theme-0.0.2-1.fc23.noarch.rpm: Already downloaded
warning: /var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade/kernel-
core-4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64.rpm: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID
34ec9cba: NOKEY
Curl error (37): Couldn't read a file:// file for file:///etc/pki/rpm-
gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64 [Couldn't open file /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-
GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64]
The downloaded packages were saved in cache till the next successful
transaction.
You can remove cached packages by executing 'dnf clean packages'.
I'm getting this exact same Curl error (37) trying to do a dnf system-
upgrade.
Except my warning is about libgudev-230-2.fc23.x86_64.rpm instead of kernel-
core-4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64.rpm as above.
Does anyone have a fix??
The fix is a manual rpm --import /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-23-primary
6:11 p.m.
On 12/18/2015 04:01 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 6:30 AM, Sam Varshavchik
> <<URL:mailto:mrsam@courier-mta.com>mrsam@courier-mta.com> wrote:
>
> One upgrade to F23 succeeded. The second server fails, repeatedly with
> "dnf system-upgrade --releasever 23 download" resulting in:
I'm having trouble getting my desktop to go from F20 to F21; among other
things, I tried the above command (with 21 instead of 23) and got this:
No such command: system-upgrade. Please use /bin/dnf --help
6:13 p.m.
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 16:11:40 -0800
Joe Zeff <joe(a)zeff.us> wrote:
On 12/18/2015 04:01 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 6:30 AM, Sam Varshavchik
>> <<URL:mailto:mrsam@courier-mta.com>mrsam@courier-mta.com> wrote:
>>
>> One upgrade to F23 succeeded. The second server fails,
>> repeatedly with "dnf system-upgrade --releasever 23 download"
>> resulting in:
I'm having trouble getting my desktop to go from F20 to F21; among
other things, I tried the above command (with 21 instead of 23) and
got this:
No such command: system-upgrade. Please use /bin/dnf --help
dnf system-upgrade plugin wasn't created until after F20 was end of
lifed, so it never had it.
You could use fedup to go from 20->21 and then dnf system-upgrade from
there.
Or perhaps it would easier to just backup your data and do a clean F23
install and restore your data instead of upgrading all that way.
kevin
6:19 p.m.
On 12/18/2015 04:13 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
You could use fedup to go from 20->21 and then dnf system-upgrade
from
there.
Every time I've tried fedup on this box I've spent several days at a CLI
cleaning things up just to get a GUI.
Or perhaps it would easier to just backup your data and do a clean
F23
install and restore your data instead of upgrading all that way.
No working DVD drive, can't boot off of USB. Not an option. And, as I
have nVidia graphics, and F23 has trouble with them, I'd rather not
right now.
6:34 p.m.
On 12/18/2015 05:19 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 12/18/2015 04:13 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> You could use fedup to go from 20->21 and then dnf system-upgrade from
> there.
>
Every time I've tried fedup on this box I've spent several days at a
CLI cleaning things up just to get a GUI.
> Or perhaps it would easier to just backup your data and do a clean F23
> install and restore your data instead of upgrading all that way.
No working DVD drive, can't boot off of USB. Not an option. And, as
I have nVidia graphics, and F23 has trouble with them, I'd rather not
right now.
Re: Nvidia ....
So, why does Nvidia not release their drivers source code to the O. S.
community?
Seems to me that Unix and Linux Heads should unite and boycott Nvidia
and other
computer device manufacturers with proprietary drivers (Broadcom comes
to mind also).
6:40 p.m.
On 12/18/2015 04:34 PM, jd1008 wrote:
Re: Nvidia ....
So, why does Nvidia not release their drivers source code to the O. S.
community?
Seems to me that Unix and Linux Heads should unite and boycott Nvidia
and other
computer device manufacturers with proprietary drivers (Broadcom comes
to mind also).
...and what does that have to do with my question?
8:30 p.m.
On 12/18/2015 06:19 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 12/18/2015 04:13 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> You could use fedup to go from 20->21 and then dnf system-upgrade from
> there.
>
Every time I've tried fedup on this box I've spent several days at a
CLI cleaning things up just to get a GUI.
> Or perhaps it would easier to just backup your data and do a clean F23
> install and restore your data instead of upgrading all that way.
No working DVD drive, can't boot off of USB. Not an option. And, as
I have nVidia graphics, and F23 has trouble with them, I'd rather not
right now.
You can do a netinstall. There needs to be one partition that is not
reformatted for this to work. A netinstall iso (installed on a
partition) is booted from grub and it it gets all the packages from a
mirror. I have been using this method since F19 and it works great. If
you create a kickstart file you can configure the install exactly the
way you want it.
David
11:47 p.m.
Allegedly, on or about 18 December 2015, jd1008 sent:
So, why does Nvidia not release their drivers source code to the O.S.
community?
Paranoia: It's mine, mine, mine, all mine...
Seems to me that Unix and Linux Heads should unite and boycott Nvidia
and other computer device manufacturers with proprietary drivers
(Broadcom comes to mind also).
As if they'd care... And then you'd limit the users, even more, as they
wouldn't be able to use their laptop (old, or find a new one that had
directly supported hardware).
--
All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is no point
trying to privately email me, I will only read messages posted to the
public lists.
Linux servers are always being dæmonised...
2:12 a.m.
On 12/18/2015 06:30 PM, dwoody5654 wrote:
>
You can do a netinstall.
Getting the upgrade to work is better, and I think I know how. And, it
doesn't require me to start out by reformatting my root partition, or
booting into Grub when there's no working system and no way to boot from
any other media.
2:14 a.m.
On 12/18/2015 06:30 PM, dwoody5654 wrote:
>
You can do a netinstall. There needs to be one partition that is not
reformatted for this to work.
Correction: I misread the above and it looked like I needed to reformat
/ before starting the installation. Still, I'd consider this to be Plan
Z, to be tried if and only if nothing else works.
3048
days inactive
3091
days old
18 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
dcw -
Greg Woods -
JD -
Joe Zeff -
Kevin Fenzi -
Rick Stevens -
Robert Arkiletian -
Sam Varshavchik -
Tim