Re: duplicate package on fresh install
On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Jaroslav Mracek wrote: > There is another option: ``dnf remove --duplicated`` Basically it's an alias to command mentioned before, but anyhow it doesn't exist in F25. > > Jaroslav > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 8:44 PM, stan wrote: >> >> On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 11:23:53 -0700 >> stan wrote: >> >> >> > dnf remove $(dnf repoquery --installonly --latest-limit -3 -q) >> >> This is wrong! I copied the wrong line. The actual command should be >> >> dnf remove $(dnf repoquery --duplicated --latest-limit -1 -q) >> ___ >> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > > > > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > -- -Igor Gnatenko ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: duplicate package on fresh install
There is another option: ``dnf remove --duplicated`` Jaroslav On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 8:44 PM, stan wrote: > On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 11:23:53 -0700 > stan wrote: > > > > dnf remove $(dnf repoquery --installonly --latest-limit -3 -q) > > This is wrong! I copied the wrong line. The actual command should be > > dnf remove $(dnf repoquery --duplicated --latest-limit -1 -q) > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: duplicate package on fresh install
On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 11:23:53 -0700 stan wrote: > dnf remove $(dnf repoquery --installonly --latest-limit -3 -q) This is wrong! I copied the wrong line. The actual command should be dnf remove $(dnf repoquery --duplicated --latest-limit -1 -q) ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: duplicate package on fresh install
On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 06:07:56 - Samuel Rakitničan wrote: > Reinstall or any other dnf operation except remove doesn't work, > didn't try --rebuilddb. There are many cases of such broken state on > forums, but system is usually working fine AFAICT. Is there a way to > alter rpm database to remove one version of a package without > altering the system? If you look at man yum2dnf, it tells you the equivalent commands under dnf for yum commands. What you are trying to do is clean dupes. These are the appropriate commands for dnf, from that man page. package-cleanup --dupes is now dnf repoquery --duplicated and package-cleanup --cleandupes is now dnf remove $(dnf repoquery --installonly --latest-limit -3 -q) I recall using this dnf command successfully, but it has been a long time. Another way of saying, be careful. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: duplicate package on fresh install
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 5:34 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos > > Could be lots of reasons. An x86_64 and i686 library installed > simultaneously can appear confusingly as duplicate libraries if you > don't ask rpm to report architecture. A system interruption during the > update can block rpm from clearing the old entries in its database. Or > a failure of '%post' operations can cause the update to fail partway > through. > > The usual answer if there are genuinely two copies reported is to do a > "reinstall" if it's two distinct versions of the same package, and to > do an "rpm --rebuilddb" and see if that helps. Reinstall or any other dnf operation except remove doesn't work, didn't try --rebuilddb. There are many cases of such broken state on forums, but system is usually working fine AFAICT. Is there a way to alter rpm database to remove one version of a package without altering the system? > > > > regards, > > Nikos > > > > [0]. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1378781 > > ___ > > devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: duplicate package on fresh install
Oh, I see, thanks. I remember a couple of years ago that Fedora installed 32-bits stuff by itself and I ended with a messed system, but I guess that was a bug. Thank you! Sylvia On Sat, 2016-09-24 at 14:46 +0300, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Sylvia wrote: > > > > This is maybe a silly question but... if you're architecture is, let's say > > > > x86_64, why would anything install an i686 version of the same package? > > If you install a 32-bit program, it may pull in other i686 > dependencies. See what happens if you try to install skype's rpm. > There is also the case of compiling stuff for i686. > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: duplicate package on fresh install
On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Sylvia wrote: > This is maybe a silly question but... if you're architecture is, let's say > x86_64, why would anything install an i686 version of the same package? If you install a 32-bit program, it may pull in other i686 dependencies. See what happens if you try to install skype's rpm. There is also the case of compiling stuff for i686. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: duplicate package on fresh install
Hello, This is maybe a silly question but... if you're architecture is, let's say x86_64, why would anything install an i686 version of the same package? Cheers, Sylvia On Fri, 2016-09-23 at 06:15 -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > > > Could be lots of reasons. An x86_64 and i686 library installed > simultaneously can appear confusingly as duplicate libraries if you > > don't ask rpm to report architecture. A system interruption during the > > update can block rpm from clearing the old entries in its database. Or > a failure of '%post' operations can cause the update to fail partway > through. > > > The usual answer if there are genuinely two copies reported is to do a > "reinstall" if it's two distinct versions of the same package, and to > do an "rpm --rebuilddb" and see if that helps. > > > > > regards, > > Nikos ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: duplicate package on fresh install
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 5:34 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: > Hello, > A user posted some issue on gnutls [0], and it turned out that after a > fresh install of f24 that user had two versions of the library > installed. I have no idea why this can be or whether that should be > expected from the installer/updater. Any insights? Could be lots of reasons. An x86_64 and i686 library installed simultaneously can appear confusingly as duplicate libraries if you don't ask rpm to report architecture. A system interruption during the update can block rpm from clearing the old entries in its database. Or a failure of '%post' operations can cause the update to fail partway through. The usual answer if there are genuinely two copies reported is to do a "reinstall" if it's two distinct versions of the same package, and to do an "rpm --rebuilddb" and see if that helps. > > regards, > Nikos > > [0]. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1378781 > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
duplicate package on fresh install
Hello, A user posted some issue on gnutls [0], and it turned out that after a fresh install of f24 that user had two versions of the library installed. I have no idea why this can be or whether that should be expected from the installer/updater. Any insights? regards, Nikos [0]. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1378781 ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
