I'm getting:
Transaction failed: Rpm transaction failed.
- file /usr/lib64/libnode.so.115 from install of
nodejs-libs-1:20.5.1-1.fc39.x86_64 conflicts with file from package
nodejs20-libs-1:20.5.1-1.fc38.x86_64
- file /usr/bin/node-20 from install of nodejs-1:20.5.1-1.fc39.x86_64
conflicts
On Thu, 2023-09-07 at 13:05 +0800, Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 2:23 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> :
>
> > dnf --releasever=39 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f39 \
> >
> > --enablerepo=updates-testing \
> > $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
> >
On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 2:23 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
:
> dnf --releasever=39 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f39 \
>
> --enablerepo=updates-testing \
> $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
> --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
> --assumeno distro-sync
>
So are the F39M
W dniu 29.08.2023 o 17:26, Adam Williamson pisze:
On Tue, 2023-08-29 at 10:33 +0200, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
Problem 2: package ghc-data-array-byte-0.1.0.1-1.fc38.x86_64 from @System
requires libHSarray-0.5.4.0-ghc9.2.6.so()(64bit), but none of the providers can
be installed
-
well other then that i have to disable rpmfusion now when i think about it
Den mån 28 aug. 2023 kl 23:35 skrev Luna Jernberg :
>
> Did this on my Thinkpad Edge a couple of days ago, and it went fine :)
>
> Den ons 23 aug. 2023 kl 20:23 skrev Miroslav Suchý :
> >
> > Do you want to make Fedora 39
On Sun, 2023-09-03 at 09:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2023-09-03 at 14:47 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> >
> >
> > Error:
> > Problem 1: conflicting requests
> > - package default-fonts-cjk-sans-4.0-8.fc39.noarch from fedora
> > requires google-noto-sans-cjk-vf-fonts, but none of
On Sun, 2023-09-03 at 14:47 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
>
> Error:
> Problem 1: conflicting requests
> - package default-fonts-cjk-sans-4.0-8.fc39.noarch from fedora
> requires google-noto-sans-cjk-vf-fonts, but none of the providers can
> be installed
> - package
Error:
Problem 1: conflicting requests
- package default-fonts-cjk-sans-4.0-8.fc39.noarch from fedora
requires google-noto-sans-cjk-vf-fonts, but none of the providers can
be installed
- package default-fonts-cjk-sans-4.0-9.fc39.noarch from updates-
testing requires
On Tue, Aug 29 2023 at 08:26:42 AM -0700, Adam Williamson
wrote:
This is likely because it defaults to `--allowerasing` behaviour? This
is kinda a controversial topic. GNOME Software also does this, and I
don't *love* it as it can result in people being surprised by packages
having disappeared
On Tue, 2023-08-29 at 10:33 +0200, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
>
> Problem 2: package ghc-data-array-byte-0.1.0.1-1.fc38.x86_64 from @System
> requires libHSarray-0.5.4.0-ghc9.2.6.so()(64bit), but none of the providers
> can be installed
>- ghc-array-0.5.4.0-133.fc38.x86_64 from @System
W dniu 23.08.2023 o 20:22, Miroslav Suchý pisze:
Do you want to make Fedora 39 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
Did this on my Thinkpad Edge a couple of days ago, and it went fine :)
Den ons 23 aug. 2023 kl 20:23 skrev Miroslav Suchý :
>
> Do you want to make Fedora 39 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
On 8/26/23 00:51, Solomon Peachy via devel wrote:
I have twenty-year-old perl scripts that still work just fine, but in my
experience, even couple-years-old python code most likely won't.
I love both perl and python, but have to say that perl stability is
partly due to the fact that its
On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 6:23 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> * this command found zero issues on my personal system - great work all
> everybody!
On my small handful of systems I found zero issues
(well, one issue on two systems with a 3rd party repo
(which was actually my own local repo, so
On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 09:08:23PM -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> No, it's a demonstration of applications that aren't being properly
> maintained when they're still using functions that have been deprecated for
> 6 releases which is also that many years. Python core is very stable.
So... you're
On 8/25/23 20:51, Solomon Peachy via devel wrote:
On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 06:55:17PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
It's a lot of output, but not *so* many problems when you boil it down.
Yeah, it's ultimately another example (or four) of how Python is utterly
worthless as a "stable"
Only this errors, none of them look like real problems:
Erro:
Problema 1: problema com o pacote instalado
telegram-desktop-4.8.4-3.fc38.x86_64
- telegram-desktop-4.8.4-3.fc38.x86_64 from @System does not belong to a
distupgrade repository
- nothing provides qt6-qtbase(x86-64) = 6.5.1 needed by
On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 06:55:17PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> It's a lot of output, but not *so* many problems when you boil it down.
Yeah, it's ultimately another example (or four) of how Python is utterly
worthless as a "stable" application platform.
> I suppose we could just vendor
On Fri, 2023-08-25 at 20:32 -0400, Solomon Peachy via devel wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 08:22:42PM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > Do you want to make Fedora 39 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time
> > and try to run:
>
> I ran this on a bunch of my fleet, lots of problems, and they
On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 08:22:42PM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Do you want to make Fedora 39 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and
> try to run:
I ran this on a bunch of my fleet, lots of problems, and they all seem
to be related to the Python 3.12 bump.
F38 Workstation #1:
On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 1:28 PM Leigh Scott wrote:
> > Hi Leigh,
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 10:03 AM Leigh Scott
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > As I'm on my laptop again, I was able to try to run the rebase again and
> > for Philip it was about rpmfusion-nonfree-updates, but I'm hitting:
> >
> >
> Hi Leigh,
>
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 10:03 AM Leigh Scott wrote:
>
>
> As I'm on my laptop again, I was able to try to run the rebase again and
> for Philip it was about rpmfusion-nonfree-updates, but I'm hitting:
>
> error: Updating rpm-md repo 'rpmfusion-free-updates': cannot update repo
Hi Leigh,
On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 10:03 AM Leigh Scott
wrote:
> Those warnings should disappear once the 39 release rpm's are installed.
> I have fixed the missing repodata for the unused updates repo's.
>
As I'm on my laptop again, I was able to try to run the rebase again and
for Philip it
Those warnings should disappear once the 39 release rpm's are installed.
I have fixed the missing repodata for the unused updates repo's.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
Hi Leigh,
On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 7:26 PM Leigh Scott wrote:
> > just a note rpmfusion free and nofree not ready
> >
> >
>
> What do you mean?
> I branched rpmfusion two week ago, the repo deps look fine to me.
>
See the reply from Philip Rhoades - I've hit the same on Silverblue when
On 8/23/23 20:22, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 39 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
> just a note rpmfusion free and nofree not ready
>
>
What is the issue?
I branched rpmfusion repo two weeks ago
$ sudo repoclosure --check rpmfusion-free --check rpmfusion-nonfree
Last metadata expiration check: 1:27:59 ago on Thu 24 Aug 2023 17:14:49 BST.
package:
> just a note rpmfusion free and nofree not ready
>
>
What do you mean?
I branched rpmfusion two week ago, the repo deps look fine to me.
$ sudo repoclosure --check rpmfusion-free --check rpmfusion-nonfreetanita999fly
Last metadata expiration check: 1:07:49 ago on Thu 24 Aug 2023 17:14:49
BTW, after removing python3-slip, python3-slip-dbus and python3-decorator,
both dnf5 and dnf produce no errors
On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 6:35 AM Tom London wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 3:39 AM Nicola Sella wrote:
>
>> Thanks Mirek,
>>
>> dnf --releasever=39
On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 3:39 AM Nicola Sella wrote:
> Thanks Mirek,
>
> dnf --releasever=39 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f39 \
>> --enablerepo=updates-testing \
>> $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
>> --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
>> --assumeno distro-sync
>>
>
On 8/23/23 04:12 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 1:41 PM Steven A. Falco mailto:stevenfa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 8/23/23 02:22 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> dnf --releasever=39 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f39 \
> --enablerepo=updates-testing \
> $(rpm
Thanks Mirek,
dnf --releasever=39 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f39 \
> --enablerepo=updates-testing \
> $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
> --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
> --assumeno distro-sync
>
Allow me to steal some testing. :)
I would like to point out that
Hello,
I got quite a few issues, some of these are from third party repos, but
others do seem to be Fedora packages that are still FTBFS/FTI (a
majority are neuro-sig packages that we're aware of and working on):
Problem 1: package python3-cypy-0.2.0-12.fc38.noarch from @System requires
On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 1:41 PM Steven A. Falco
wrote:
> On 8/23/23 02:22 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > dnf --releasever=39 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f39 \
> > --enablerepo=updates-testing \
> > $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
> --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
On 2023-08-24 04:22, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 39 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
Miroslav Suchý venit, vidit, dixit 2023-08-23 20:22:42:
> Do you want to make Fedora 39 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
On Wed, 2023-08-23 at 20:22 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Do you want to make Fedora 39 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
> time and try to run:
>
> dnf --releasever=39 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f39 \
> --enablerepo=updates-testing \
> $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null &&
just a note rpmfusion free and nofree not ready
however all was succesfull with adding the parameters --best -- allowerasing
Installing weak dependencies:
avif-pixbuf-loader x86_64
0.11.1-11.fc39 fedora 16 k
> Problem 1: package libblockdev-vdo-2.24-2.fc32.x86_64 from @System requires
> libbd_utils.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
> - libblockdev-utils-2.28-5.fc38.x86_64 from @System does not belong to a
> distupgrade repository
> - problem with installed package
On 8/23/23 02:22 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
dnf --releasever=39 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f39 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
Problem 1: problem with installed package
Do you want to make Fedora 39 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=39
41 matches
Mail list logo
