Bug 1268609
Summary: | 'dnf upgrade' finds no updates but 'dnf upgrade *' does. | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jillian Morgan <penguin.wrangler> |
Component: | dnf | Assignee: | Packaging Maintenance Team <packaging-team-maint> |
Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | 23 | CC: | jmracek, jsilhan, mluscon, packaging-team-maint, penguin.wrangler, pnemade, ppisar, tim.lauridsen, vmukhame |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | x86_64 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2015-10-13 14:02:56 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Jillian Morgan
2015-10-03 15:42:50 UTC
I have similar issue with dnf-1.1.2-2.fc24. I built updated perl locally with increased release number, put the binary packages into a local repository and tried to `dnf -v --enablerepo=perl --best --allowerasing upgrade'. It does not report anything for upgrade. However, request for upgrading a specific package by a package name, e.g `dnf -v --enablerepo=perl --best --allowerasing upgrade perl' will offer the new perl package and its dependencies. It forgets for another other newer packages available in the local repository. In contrast to the original reported, `dnf -v --enablerepo=perl --best --allowerasing info perl' reports both current perl from @System repository and the new perl from perl repository. It looks like dnf does not consult any installed package for an upgrade. It consults only packages explicitly listed on the command line. This is known issue for the release and it was replaced by newer version that solved the problem. We are sorry for difficulties. To update to new version of dnf, please use 'dnf upgrade dnf', than everything should work correctly. Jaroslav, The latest available build appears to be dnf-1.1.2-4.fc23, which I installed on October 6th (a week ago). See http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=14310 As of this morning, using dnf-1.1.2-4, I still could not update packages without using the wildcard workaround described earlier. What "new version" of dnf corrects this issue, and where do we find it? Dear Ian, Please are you sure about installed version of dnf (rpm -q dnf)? With version dnf-1.1.2-4.fc23 we were unable reproduce your problem. Please try also 'dnf upgrade --refresh' it could also help. Jaroslav, Yes, the installed DNF is really up-to-date: $ rpm -q dnf dnf-1.1.2-4.fc23.noarch $ dnf --version 1.1.2 Installed: dnf-0:1.1.2-4.fc23.noarch at 2015-10-06 16:07 Built : Fedora Project at 2015-09-30 13:56 Installed: rpm-0:4.13.0-0.rc1.4.fc23.x86_64 at 2015-10-13 13:03 Built : Fedora Project at 2015-10-12 13:48 Since I had to do a forced upgrade with the * wildcard this morning, all packages are currently up-to-date, therefore 'dnf upgrade --refresh' did re-download all the metadata but did not find anything new. I will monitor the metadata for new updates over the next day or two and try again when there are some. Well, for whatever reason, it worked today. A plain 'dnf upgrde --refresh' found and applied updates without using the wildcard trick. I can now concur that this issue is resolved. |