Bug 1227238 - redhat-lsb can't install in F22 - confusing dnf message
Summary: redhat-lsb can't install in F22 - confusing dnf message
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 1148627
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: dnf
Version: 22
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Packaging Maintenance Team
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2015-06-02 08:44 UTC by wangdong
Modified: 2015-07-24 10:08 UTC (History)
10 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-07-24 10:08:17 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description wangdong 2015-06-02 08:44:30 UTC
Description of problem:
I want to install a chrome on my F22 system.(this F22 system was upgrade from a clean F21)
When I config a repo and install chrome it told me 
"Error: package google-chrome-stable-43.0.2357.81-1.x86_64 requires lsb >= 4.0, but none of the providers can be installed
"

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
F22

How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install Fedora 21 then use fedup --network 22 upgrade to F22
2. Config google-chrome repo like this 

[google-chrome]
name=google-chrome
baseurl=http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/rpm/stable/x86_64
enabled=1
gpgcheck=1
skip_if_unavailable=True

3. Use dnf install google-chrome it will return
[root@dhcp-136-105 yum.repos.d]# dnf install google-chrome
Last metadata expiration check performed 1:44:46 ago on Tue Jun  2 14:54:36 2015.
Error: package google-chrome-unstable-45.0.2414.0-1.x86_64 requires lsb >= 4.0, but none of the providers can be installed

4. When I try to install redhat-lsb use command dnf install redhat-lsb

[root@dhcp-136-105 yum.repos.d]# dnf install redhat-lsb
Last metadata expiration check performed 1:45:36 ago on Tue Jun  2 14:54:36 2015.
Error: package redhat-lsb-4.1-29.fc22.x86_64 requires redhat-lsb-languages = 4.1-29.fc22, but none of the providers can be installed

5. Then I try to install redhat-lsb-languages 
[root@dhcp-136-105 yum.repos.d]# dnf install redhat-lsb-languages
Last metadata expiration check performed 1:47:52 ago on Tue Jun  2 14:54:36 2015.
Error: package redhat-lsb-languages-4.1-29.fc22.x86_64 requires perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker), but none of the providers can be installed

I think dnf can solve dependency by itself.

If you need more information please let me know.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 2 Parag Nemade 2015-06-02 09:11:11 UTC
I have no fresh machine to test this but I do have Fedora 22 system on which I removed redhat-lsb and google-chrome packages. I then installed them and installation using dnf has not shown any errors to me.

Comment 3 Ondrej Vasik 2015-06-02 10:20:12 UTC
I believe there might be "fedup involved" in this issue. However, not based on the report, I don't think there is a bug in redhat-lsb package.
Based on https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-8818/libdb-5.3.28-12.fc22,libdb4-4.8.30-18.fc22 , this is still in testing, but both requirements should be available in testing repository only, so transaction is a bit weird.
Sounds like -testing was enabled for fedup, but disabled later on for update - causing libdb updated, but libdb-devel unavailable for depsolving.

I tend to notabug this report. Maybe it can be reported a bit differently against dnf - as usability bug - as I think the dnf error message might be confusing here.

Can you confirm that testing is disabled and enabling it resolves the yum transaction issue?

Comment 4 wangdong 2015-06-03 02:18:33 UTC
At least, I installed chrome by "yum-deprecated" yesterday.

"dnf downgrade libdb" can't make "libdb-5.3.28-12.fc22.x86_64" downgrade to "libdb-devel-5.3.28-9.fc22.x86_64"

Then I used "dnf distros-sync", it can downgrade libdb to correct version.


I think this dnf error message "requires lsb >= 4.0" is not good. 

If it same with yum's error message that user can clearly understand.

Comment 5 Radek Holy 2015-07-24 10:08:17 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1148627 ***


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.