Re: dnf hold?

[Ed Greshko]

On 11/21/17 15:27, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 11/20/2017 06:31 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
>> Look at the man page for dnf.conf and check out the option "excludepkgs".  
>> It can be
>> placed either in the dnf.conf or in a specific repo file.
>
> I'm guessing you have F26.  When I check the dnf.conf man page in F25, it only
> lists the "exclude" option, there is no "excludepkgs" option.  I wonder if 
> they
> added it because the opposite option is called "includepkgs", which was a 
> strange
> asymmetry.  But if the OP is on F25, he might need to use "exclude".
>
> dnf-1.1.10-6.fc25.noarch 

Not on this machine.  This one is F27.   I could go back and check F26 on a VM 
if it
matters. 

dnf-2.7.5-1.fc27.noarch

So, Todd has found the "difference".  I suspect, a.k.a. hope, both verbs will be
accepted going forward.  :-)

-- 
Fedora Users List - The place to go to speculate endlessly



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: dnf hold?

[Todd Zullinger]

Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 11/20/2017 06:31 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
Look at the man page for dnf.conf and check out the option 
"excludepkgs".  It can be placed either in the dnf.conf or in a 
specific repo file.


I'm guessing you have F26.  When I check the dnf.conf man page in 
F25, it only lists the "exclude" option, there is no "excludepkgs" 
option.  I wonder if they added it because the opposite option is 
called "includepkgs", which was a strange asymmetry.  But if the OP 
is on F25, he might need to use "exclude".


dnf-1.1.10-6.fc25.noarch 


The documentation was updated in dnf-2.0 to list excludepkgs instead 
of exclude¹.  Both options are still respected in the config, as far as 
I can see, though using excludepkgs is probably the better one to use 
if you're not sharing a config file with any f25 systems.


¹ 
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf/commit/f87536c53#diff-4d744e69692fb152ba5488afc131d5db

--
Todd
~~
I have an existential map; it has 'you are here' written all over it.
   -- Steven Wright



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: dnf hold?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 11/20/2017 06:31 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:

Look at the man page for dnf.conf and check out the option "excludepkgs".  It 
can be
placed either in the dnf.conf or in a specific repo file.


I'm guessing you have F26.  When I check the dnf.conf man page in F25, 
it only lists the "exclude" option, there is no "excludepkgs" option.  I 
wonder if they added it because the opposite option is called 
"includepkgs", which was a strange asymmetry.  But if the OP is on F25, 
he might need to use "exclude".


dnf-1.1.10-6.fc25.noarch
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: dnf hold?

[Ed Greshko]

On 11/21/17 13:23, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 11/20/2017 07:09 PM, Geoffrey Leach wrote:
>> Ah. For the record, its -x or --exclude. However,that will, "exclude 
>> packages by
>> name or glob".  I'll give it a try. Thanks.
>
> That's on the dnf command line, not in the config file.
>

And, because I enjoy being pedantic.

[egreshko@meimei dnf]$ cat dnf.conf
[main]
gpgcheck=1
installonly_limit=3
clean_requirements_on_remove=True
excludepkgs=NetworkManager*
#fastestmirror=true

[egreshko@meimei dnf]$ dnf check-update
Last metadata expiration check: 0:02:48 ago on Tue 21 Nov 2017 01:59:16 PM CST.

perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib.x86_64   2.075-1.fc27    
updates
postgresql-libs.x86_64  9.6.6-1.fc27    
updates
selinux-policy.noarch   3.13.1-283.16.fc27  
updates
selinux-policy-devel.noarch 3.13.1-283.16.fc27  
updates
selinux-policy-doc.noarch   3.13.1-283.16.fc27  
updates
selinux-policy-sandbox.noarch   3.13.1-283.16.fc27  
updates
selinux-policy-targeted.noarch  3.13.1-283.16.fc27  
updates

And then.

[egreshko@meimei dnf]$ cat dnf.conf
[main]
gpgcheck=1
installonly_limit=3
clean_requirements_on_remove=True
#excludepkgs=NetworkManager*
#fastestmirror=true
[egreshko@meimei dnf]$ dnf check-update
Last metadata expiration check: 0:03:38 ago on Tue 21 Nov 2017 01:59:16 PM CST.

NetworkManager.x86_64    1:1.8.4-7.fc27 
updates
NetworkManager-adsl.x86_64   1:1.8.4-7.fc27 
updates
NetworkManager-bluetooth.x86_64  1:1.8.4-7.fc27 
updates
NetworkManager-config-connectivity-fedora.noarch 1:1.8.4-7.fc27 
updates
NetworkManager-glib.x86_64   1:1.8.4-7.fc27 
updates
NetworkManager-libnm.x86_64  1:1.8.4-7.fc27 
updates
NetworkManager-wifi.x86_64   1:1.8.4-7.fc27 
updates
NetworkManager-wwan.x86_64   1:1.8.4-7.fc27 
updates
perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib.x86_64    2.075-1.fc27   
updates
postgresql-libs.x86_64   9.6.6-1.fc27   
updates
selinux-policy.noarch    3.13.1-283.16.fc27 
updates
selinux-policy-devel.noarch  3.13.1-283.16.fc27 
updates
selinux-policy-doc.noarch    3.13.1-283.16.fc27 
updates
selinux-policy-sandbox.noarch    3.13.1-283.16.fc27 
updates
selinux-policy-targeted.noarch   3.13.1-283.16.fc27 
updates

So, when I read the man page for dnf.conf and see

   excludepkgs
  list

  Exclude packages of this repository, specified by a name or a glob
  and  separated  by  a comma, from all operations.  Can be disabled
  using --disableexcludes command line switch.

I guess they weren't incorrect.  Seems like a good job of parsing to me and
"correcting" me wasn't necessary.  :-) :-)


-- 
Fedora Users List - The place to go to speculate endlessly


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: dnf hold?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 11/20/2017 07:09 PM, Geoffrey Leach wrote:

Ah. For the record, its -x or --exclude. However,that will, "exclude packages by 
name or glob".  I'll give it a try. Thanks.


That's on the dnf command line, not in the config file.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: mozilla-adblockplus disabled in FF57

[Frederic Muller]

On 11/21/2017 11:01 AM, Andre Robatino wrote:
> Are you running Adblock Plus using the mozilla-adblockplus-2.9.1 Fedora 
> package (not the 3.0.1 upstream version)?
> ___
> users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Oh no I am not, that probably explains it. Sorry, should have paid more
attention.

Fred
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: mozilla-adblockplus disabled in FF57

[Andre Robatino]

Are you running Adblock Plus using the mozilla-adblockplus-2.9.1 Fedora package 
(not the 3.0.1 upstream version)?
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: mozilla-adblockplus disabled in FF57

[Frederic Muller]

On 11/21/2017 10:28 AM, Andre Robatino wrote:
> The package mozilla-adblockplus is now disabled in all supported versions of 
> Fedora, which have FF57 in stable. I filed 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1513731 but no response yet. I 
> can't find any sign of recent activity by the assignee, Andreas Thienemann. 
> The last few builds of mozilla-adblockplus were by rathann (FAS name, don't 
> know full name) who just posted builds for the new mozilla-noscript-10.1.1 
> (very quickly BTW, was just posted upstream a little while ago). Does anyone 
> know if Mr. Thienemann is still active?
> ___
> users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Hi!

I think you might have an issue specific to your system as I run FF57
and Adblock plus without any issue.

Fred
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

mozilla-adblockplus disabled in FF57

[Andre Robatino]

The package mozilla-adblockplus is now disabled in all supported versions of 
Fedora, which have FF57 in stable. I filed 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1513731 but no response yet. I 
can't find any sign of recent activity by the assignee, Andreas Thienemann. The 
last few builds of mozilla-adblockplus were by rathann (FAS name, don't know 
full name) who just posted builds for the new mozilla-noscript-10.1.1 (very 
quickly BTW, was just posted upstream a little while ago). Does anyone know if 
Mr. Thienemann is still active?
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: dnf hold?

[Geoffrey Leach]

On 11/20/2017 03:32:27 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 11/20/2017 03:12 PM, Geoffrey Leach wrote:
> > On 11/20/2017 06:31:00 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> >> On 11/20/17 22:19, Geoffrey Leach wrote:
> >>> Now that Mozilla has provided us with its latest and greatest
> (sic!)
> >> Firefox, I need to prevent updates to firefox. Dnf does not appear
> to
> >> provide a "don't update this" option. Any suggestions?
> >>
> >>
> >> Sure it does.
> >>
> >> Look at the man page for dnf.conf and check out the option
> >> "excludepkgs".  It can be
> >> placed either in the dnf.conf or in a specific repo file.
> >>
> > H ... let me guess. Feature added in the version included with
> Fedora 26? I'm running 25, alas. But thanks, anyways.
> 
> It's actually just exclude= in the config file and has been around for
> a 
> while.  See "man dnf.conf" for info.

Got it. Thanks.


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: dnf hold?

[Geoffrey Leach]

On 11/20/2017 05:27:11 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 11/21/17 07:12, Geoffrey Leach wrote:
> > On 11/20/2017 06:31:00 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> >> On 11/20/17 22:19, Geoffrey Leach wrote:
> >>> Now that Mozilla has provided us with its latest and greatest
> (sic!)
> >> Firefox, I need to prevent updates to firefox. Dnf does not appear
> to
> >> provide a "don't update this" option. Any suggestions?
> >>
> >>
> >> Sure it does.
> >>
> >> Look at the man page for dnf.conf and check out the option
> >> "excludepkgs".  It can be
> >> placed either in the dnf.conf or in a specific repo file.
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> Fedora Users List - The place to go to speculate endlessly
> >>
> >>
> > H ... let me guess. Feature added in the version included with
> Fedora 26? I'm running 25, alas. But thanks, anyways.
> >
> 
> NOPE  As Samuel said, it has been around since the inception of
> dnf. 
> 
> It is actually "version lock" that was a later addition that came into
> being, I
> think, in F25 or F26.

Ah. For the record, its -x or --exclude. However,that will, "exclude packages 
by name or glob".  I'll give it a try. Thanks.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: dnf hold?

[Ed Greshko]

On 11/21/17 07:12, Geoffrey Leach wrote:
> On 11/20/2017 06:31:00 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
>> On 11/20/17 22:19, Geoffrey Leach wrote:
>>> Now that Mozilla has provided us with its latest and greatest (sic!)
>> Firefox, I need to prevent updates to firefox. Dnf does not appear to
>> provide a "don't update this" option. Any suggestions?
>>
>>
>> Sure it does.
>>
>> Look at the man page for dnf.conf and check out the option
>> "excludepkgs".  It can be
>> placed either in the dnf.conf or in a specific repo file.
>>
>> -- 
>> Fedora Users List - The place to go to speculate endlessly
>>
>>
> H ... let me guess. Feature added in the version included with Fedora 26? 
> I'm running 25, alas. But thanks, anyways.
>

NOPE  As Samuel said, it has been around since the inception of dnf. 

It is actually "version lock" that was a later addition that came into being, I
think, in F25 or F26.

-- 
Fedora Users List - The place to go to speculate endlessly



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: dnf hold?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 11/20/2017 03:12 PM, Geoffrey Leach wrote:

On 11/20/2017 06:31:00 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:

On 11/20/17 22:19, Geoffrey Leach wrote:

Now that Mozilla has provided us with its latest and greatest (sic!)

Firefox, I need to prevent updates to firefox. Dnf does not appear to
provide a "don't update this" option. Any suggestions?


Sure it does.

Look at the man page for dnf.conf and check out the option
"excludepkgs".  It can be
placed either in the dnf.conf or in a specific repo file.


H ... let me guess. Feature added in the version included with Fedora 26? 
I'm running 25, alas. But thanks, anyways.


It's actually just exclude= in the config file and has been around for a 
while.  See "man dnf.conf" for info.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: dnf hold?

[Geoffrey Leach]

On 11/20/2017 09:37:34 AM, John Pilkington wrote:
> On 20/11/17 16:52, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Ed Greshko  > > wrote:
> > 
> > On 11/20/17 22:19, Geoffrey Leach wrote:
> > > Now that Mozilla has provided us with its latest and greatest
> (sic!) Firefox, I need to prevent updates to firefox. Dnf does not
> appear to provide a "don't update this" option. Any suggestions?
> > 
> > 
> > Sure it does.
> > 
> > Look at the man page for dnf.conf and check out the option
> > "excludepkgs".  It can be
> > placed either in the dnf.conf or in a specific repo file.
> > 
> > 
> > I wish I had the skillset needed to write a plugin for this...
> > 
> > I think he's looking for the same thing I am. I don't want dnf to
> ignore 
> > that a new package exists, I just don't want it installed by
> default.
> > 
> > For example, I maintain a package for the Ubiquity Unifi controller.
> 
> > Most of the time the upgrade completes without a problem, but even
> if it 
> > does, it can cause the latest firmware to be updated on all the
> access 
> > points. That's something you want to schedule, not happen
> automatically.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Richard
> 
> How about
> 
> python3-dnf-plugin-versionlock-2.1.5-1.fc27.noarch.rpm ?
> 
Looks like what I need. thanks.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: dnf hold?

[Geoffrey Leach]

On 11/20/2017 06:31:00 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 11/20/17 22:19, Geoffrey Leach wrote:
> > Now that Mozilla has provided us with its latest and greatest (sic!)
> Firefox, I need to prevent updates to firefox. Dnf does not appear to
> provide a "don't update this" option. Any suggestions?
> 
> 
> Sure it does.
> 
> Look at the man page for dnf.conf and check out the option
> "excludepkgs".  It can be
> placed either in the dnf.conf or in a specific repo file.
> 
> -- 
> Fedora Users List - The place to go to speculate endlessly
> 
> 

H ... let me guess. Feature added in the version included with Fedora 26? 
I'm running 25, alas. But thanks, anyways.


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F26->F27 w/ dnf system-upgrade: Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'updates'

[Sam Varshavchik]

Richard Shaw writes:

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 6:04 AM, Sam Varshavchik mr...@courier-mta.com> wrote:



   Bug 1513111



Thanks for the pointer...  I'm not in a hurry to upgrade so I may just wait  
for a "fix" instead of messing with the workaround.


It is relatively simple to temporarily edit the .conf files in  
/etc/yum.repos.d for whatever custom repository you have that have a short  
expiration period, and set them to a month, or something. Then, delete  
everything that was downloaded the first time, and do a 'dnf system-upgrade  
download' again.


This should put a sufficiently long metadata expiration on the downloaded  
packages so that dnf doesn't try to refresh them during a 'dnf system- 
upgrade reboot'. After the upgrade restore the original expiration  
settings, and do a 'dnf clean all'.




pgpzl6GSbpt1k.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: dnf hold?

[John Pilkington]

On 20/11/17 16:52, Richard Shaw wrote:
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Ed Greshko > wrote:


On 11/20/17 22:19, Geoffrey Leach wrote:
> Now that Mozilla has provided us with its latest and greatest (sic!) Firefox, I 
need to prevent updates to firefox. Dnf does not appear to provide a "don't update 
this" option. Any suggestions?


Sure it does.

Look at the man page for dnf.conf and check out the option
"excludepkgs".  It can be
placed either in the dnf.conf or in a specific repo file.


I wish I had the skillset needed to write a plugin for this...

I think he's looking for the same thing I am. I don't want dnf to ignore 
that a new package exists, I just don't want it installed by default.


For example, I maintain a package for the Ubiquity Unifi controller. 
Most of the time the upgrade completes without a problem, but even if it 
does, it can cause the latest firmware to be updated on all the access 
points. That's something you want to schedule, not happen automatically.


Thanks,
Richard


How about

python3-dnf-plugin-versionlock-2.1.5-1.fc27.noarch.rpm ?




___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F26->F27 w/ dnf system-upgrade: Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'updates'

[Richard Shaw]

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 6:04 AM, Sam Varshavchik 
wrote:

>
> Bug 1513111


Thanks for the pointer...  I'm not in a hurry to upgrade so I may just wait
for a "fix" instead of messing with the workaround.

Thanks,
Richard
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: dnf hold?

[Richard Shaw]

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Ed Greshko  wrote:

> On 11/20/17 22:19, Geoffrey Leach wrote:
> > Now that Mozilla has provided us with its latest and greatest (sic!)
> Firefox, I need to prevent updates to firefox. Dnf does not appear to
> provide a "don't update this" option. Any suggestions?
>
>
> Sure it does.
>
> Look at the man page for dnf.conf and check out the option "excludepkgs".
> It can be
> placed either in the dnf.conf or in a specific repo file.


I wish I had the skillset needed to write a plugin for this...

I think he's looking for the same thing I am. I don't want dnf to ignore
that a new package exists, I just don't want it installed by default.

For example, I maintain a package for the Ubiquity Unifi controller. Most
of the time the upgrade completes without a problem, but even if it does,
it can cause the latest firmware to be updated on all the access points.
That's something you want to schedule, not happen automatically.

Thanks,
Richard
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: dnf hold?

[Ed Greshko]

On 11/20/17 22:19, Geoffrey Leach wrote:
> Now that Mozilla has provided us with its latest and greatest (sic!) Firefox, 
> I need to prevent updates to firefox. Dnf does not appear to provide a "don't 
> update this" option. Any suggestions?


Sure it does.

Look at the man page for dnf.conf and check out the option "excludepkgs".  It 
can be
placed either in the dnf.conf or in a specific repo file.

-- 
Fedora Users List - The place to go to speculate endlessly



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

dnf hold?

[Geoffrey Leach]

Now that Mozilla has provided us with its latest and greatest (sic!) Firefox, I 
need to prevent updates to firefox. Dnf does not appear to provide a "don't 
update this" option. Any suggestions?

Thanks.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: rsync from F27 box causes higher (30x) cpu on F26 box?

[Jakub Jelen]

Hello,
this might be related to 

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OpenSSH_Server_Crypto_Policy

Can you check what ciphers, macs were used in your Fedora 26 and what
is used now? We can probably blame the change of the default cipher,
from ChaCha20 to AES256, but I don't have the exact numbers.

Can you try to uncomment last line of /etc/sysconfig/sshd to overwrite
system-wide policy:

CRYPTO_POLICY=

If it has so significant performance impact, we should adjust the
policy to prefer ChaCha20.


Regards,
Jakub Jelen

On Thu, 2017-11-16 at 19:44 +0100, Kasper Pedersen wrote:
> I have been poking at this for some hours, and by now I could use
> a second opinion. Or clue. Thirteen black candles?
> 
> 
> Somehow, when I sit on a F27 machine and pull from a F26 machine
> using
> rsync, something extremely inefficient happens in the F26 machine.
> 
> If I sit on a F26 machine and pull from the F26 machine, it is fast.
> 
> 
> The good state:
> ---
> I had 3 reasonable machines, all on F26:
> 
> Server - 1.8Ghz Haswell-celeron dualcore
> Desktop - 3.2GHz Haswell
> Backup - 2.4GHz Core2Q
> 
> Backup runs rsync, and pulls from Server and Desktop using ssh.
> Nothing fancy, it copies and shuts itself down.
> When Backup was reading from Server, Server would have about
> 
>  - 30% cpu to rsync
>  - 60% cpu to ssh
> 
> and deliver 100MB/s reliably. So does Desktop.
> 
> 
> The bad state:
> --
> After one such rsync run, I upgraded Backup to F27.
> When Backup pulls from Server, Server shows:
> 
>  - 99% cpu to rsync
>  - 6% cpu to ssh
> 
> and it delivers **11MB/s**, one tenth of what it did before.
> So, 30x higher cpu load per byte delivered.
> 
> So, somehow, the rsync running on F27, which by the way reports
> the same version and capabilities as the one on F26, triggers
> something in the spawned process that behaves differently.
> 
> 
> 
> On the server, the ssh-spawned rsync process looks the same whether
> it is Backup or Desktop pulling from it:
> 
> On Server, with Backup as client, 11MB/s:
> root 25042 34.4  0.0 124996  5620 ?Rs   18:54   0:40
> rsync
> --server --sender -vlogDtpre.iLsfxC .
> /bulk/mux/media/xbn-2017_10_29_010103.m.ts
> /bulk/mux/media/xbn-2017_11_04_235600.m.ts
> /bulk/mux/media/xbn-2017_11_12_005938.m.ts
> /bulk/mux/media/xbn-2017_11_12_011442.m.ts
> /bulk/mux/media/xbn-2017_11_12_015031.m.ts
> 
> 
> On server, with Desktop as client, 100MB/s:
> root 25152 31.9  0.0 122344  3000 ?Rs   18:56   0:05
> rsync
> --server --sender -vlogDtpre.iLsfxC .
> /bulk/mux/media/xbn-2017_10_29_010103.m.ts
> /bulk/mux/media/xbn-2017_11_04_235600.m.ts
> /bulk/mux/media/xbn-2017_11_12_005938.m.ts
> /bulk/mux/media/xbn-2017_11_12_011442.m.ts
> /bulk/mux/media/xbn-2017_11_12_015031.m.ts
> 
> The command being run on Backup or Desktop is:
> rsync -av -e 'ssh -i id_ecdsa'  --exclude XA/ --exclude video2/
> root@10.5.5.1:/bulk/mux/media/xbn* . --progress
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Things I did:
> -
> Tried the still-installed F26 and F25 kernels
> Desktop (F26) can rsync to and from Server(F26) at full speed.
> All machines get 110MB/s when running iperf, all six ways.
> The Sky2 nic in Backup is not spewing errors
> iperf shows no dropped.
> Swapped switchports between Desktop and Backup
> Switch does not report errors
> 
> Things to do:
> -
> swap nics
> upgrade a sacrificial F26 machine to F27 and try from that
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F26->F27 w/ dnf system-upgrade: Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'updates'

[Sam Varshavchik]

Richard Shaw writes:


« HTML content follows »

I usually have trouble upgrading because I keep a local repository of  
packages and because they are shared via NFS dnf treats them as local files  
and doesn't download them. I've worked around that (F25->F26) by disabling it  
temporarily and distro-syncing after update.



I've also disabled my squid package cache proxy just in case but still the  
problem remains. I haven't seen anything on the list and most of the google  
search results are not for F26 to F27 upgrades so does anyone have a clue  
what's going on?


Bug 1513111



pgpU86dRDRTtb.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Getting permanentiy in F27: failed to synchronize cache for repo 'region51-chrome-gnome-shell', disabling.

[Joachim Backes]

Each time if I'm running 'dnf upgrade', I see:

failed to synchronize cache for repo 'region51-chrome-gnome-shell', 
disabling.


Anybody sees this too?

Kind regards

Joachim Backes
--

Fedora release 27 (Twenty Seven)
Kernel-4.13.13-300.fc27.x86_64


Joachim Backes 
https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org