| Summary: | dnf fail updating, while drakrpm-update succeed, when dnf doesn't have all needed repositories enabled, but urpmi does. | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Mageia | Reporter: | Radek Raczkowski <rdkracz> |
| Component: | RPM Packages | Assignee: | Mageia Bug Squad <bugsquad> |
| Status: | RESOLVED OLD | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | Normal | CC: | 79625490833, fri, lewyssmith, marja11, ngompa13, rdkracz |
| Version: | 8 | Keywords: | NEEDINFO |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Source RPM: | dnf-4.6.0-1.mga8.src.rpm | CVE: | |
| Status comment: | |||
|
Description
Radek Raczkowski
2022-02-20 10:58:28 CET
Radek Raczkowski
2022-02-20 10:58:36 CET
CC:
(none) =>
rdkracz It looks like 32bit repos for dnf are not setup so dependencies can not be found Enable the 32bit repos, because as example steam needs them. https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Using_DNF Forget my last comment. There are other conflicts ongoing.... One difference is that from command line you used dnf, but Mageia default updater is drakrpm-update. They use different repo description files... are they not in sync, or other problem? This is not my cup of tea. Summary:
I can't update system due to dependency problem from terminal but Mageia Updater doesn't seem to have a problem =>
dnf fail updating, while drakrpm-update succeed. Yesterday, I updated Yandex browser via dnf, the flight is normal. It is better to carry out updates from the main reps through urpm, and through dnf from third-party incompatible with urpm. CC:
(none) =>
79625490833 Although some people say it is all right to mix Mageia rpm utilitites & DNF, the main opinion is not to mix them. They do some things differently. What Nikolay suggests above may be a good compromise. CC'ing Neal for his opinion about Radek's problem. Source RPM:
(none) =>
dnf-4.6.0-1.mga8.src.rpm I will add that when I installed the package, of my own assembly, using dnf, he pulled the dependencies from the main reps well. When you set it up correctly it should work to use both. One reason we do not recommend it generally is it is easy to make mistakes, i.e if user set up repos too differently (i.e with or wihtout 32 bit on 64 bit, tainted or not, backport or not etc may cause different deps or versions), urpmi use a skip list for what user say not to install, while I suppose dnf use other means, and it is possible to foul up orphan tracking. @ Radek If you still have this problem, please give the output of (in a konsole/terminal): dnf repolist and of: urpmq --list-media active If you no longer have this problem, you can close this report while telling whether you did anything to fix the problem CC:
(none) =>
marja11 @ Radek Closing as OLD because you didn't reply. Feel free to add the requested information and reopen this report if the problem persists Resolution:
(none) =>
OLD |