Bug 1350930

This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 25 development cycle.
Changing version to '25'.

Fedora 24 suffers from this issue too.

Don't know if it's related, but it's basically impossible to do reviews with the tool. I get the error above and I can not make the manual cache creation work.

I got continuos prompts for importing GPG keys which are of course happening in the background, for example:

DEBUG: Running: dnf repoquery -C --quiet --file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/sphinxcontrib
Importing GPG key 0xFDB19C98:
 Userid     : "Fedora 25 Primary (25) <fedora-25-primary>"
 Fingerprint: C437 DCCD 558A 66A3 7D6F 4372 4089 D8F2 FDB1 9C98
 From       : /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-25-x86_64

Importing GPG key 0xFDB19C98:
 Userid     : "Fedora 25 Primary (25) <fedora-25-primary>"
 Fingerprint: C437 DCCD 558A 66A3 7D6F 4372 4089 D8F2 FDB1 9C98
 From       : /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-25-x86_64

Error: Cache-only enabled but no cache for 'fedora-cisco-openh264'
ERROR: Cannot run dnf repoquery -C --quiet --file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/sphinxcontrib
DEBUG: Running: dnf repoquery -C --quiet --file /usr/share/doc/python2-sphinxcontrib-autoprogram
Importing GPG key 0xFDB19C98:
 Userid     : "Fedora 25 Primary (25) <fedora-25-primary>"
 Fingerprint: C437 DCCD 558A 66A3 7D6F 4372 4089 D8F2 FDB1 9C98
 From       : /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-25-x86_64

After many attempts (pressing enter, pressing "y" and enter, disabling gpgcheck in mock) the best I could get so far was this:

09-24 12:26 root         DEBUG    Running: dnf repoquery -C --whatprovides python-sphinx
09-24 12:26 root         DEBUG    Running: dnf repoquery -C --whatprovides python-six
09-24 12:26 root         DEBUG    Running: dnf repoquery -C --whatprovides python(abi)
09-24 12:26 root         DEBUG    Running: dnf repoquery -q -C --requires --resolve Is this ok [y/N]: Is this ok [y/N]:
09-24 12:26 root         DEBUG    Running: dnf repoquery -C -l Is this ok [y/N]: Is this ok [y/N]: filesystem
09-24 12:26 root         DEBUG    Exception down the road...
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/FedoraReview/review_helper.py", line 237, in run
    self._do_run(outfile)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/FedoraReview/review_helper.py", line 226, in _do_run
    self._do_report(outfile)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/FedoraReview/review_helper.py", line 99, in _do_report
    self._run_checks(self.bug.spec_file, self.bug.srpm_file, outfile)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/FedoraReview/review_helper.py", line 118, in _run_checks
    writedown=not Settings.no_report)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/FedoraReview/checks.py", line 378, in run_checks
    run_check(name)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/FedoraReview/checks.py", line 352, in run_check
    check.run()
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/FedoraReview/check_base.py", line 245, in run
    self.run_on_applicable()
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/FedoraReview/plugins/generic.py", line 1113, in run_on_applicable
    pkg_deps_paths = get_deps_paths(pkg_deps)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/FedoraReview/plugins/generic.py", line 1103, in get_deps_paths
    paths = deps.list_paths(pkg_deps)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/FedoraReview/deps.py", line 187, in list_paths
    paths = check_output(cmd)
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/subprocess.py", line 574, in check_output
    raise CalledProcessError(retcode, cmd, output=output)
CalledProcessError: Command '['dnf', 'repoquery', '-C', '-l', 'Is this ok [y/N]: Is this ok [y/N]:', 'filesystem']' returned non-zero exit status 1
09-24 12:26 root         ERROR    Exception down the road...(logs in /home/slaanesh/.cache/fedora-review.log)
09-24 12:26 root         DEBUG    Report completed:  272.576 seconds

Also tried to do the procedure on a fresh new Fedora 25 VM and the results are the same.

on a different machine, this works for me.

When removing the -C, I get a different error, this issue is more about hiding the real error? 

What I got was:

Completion plugin: Generating completion cache...
Completion plugin: Can't write completion cache: attempt to write a readonly database

I've got the fedora-cisco-openh264 repo enabled on my host machine, which is running a freshly installed F-25.  From the host's command line, without fedora-review or mock involved at all:

$ dnf repoquery -C -l glibc
Importing GPG key 0xFDB19C98:
 Userid     : "Fedora 25 Primary (25) <fedora-25-primary>"
 Fingerprint: C437 DCCD 558A 66A3 7D6F 4372 4089 D8F2 FDB1 9C98
 From       : /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-25-x86_64
Is this ok [y/N]: y
Importing GPG key 0xFDB19C98:
 Userid     : "Fedora 25 Primary (25) <fedora-25-primary>"
 Fingerprint: C437 DCCD 558A 66A3 7D6F 4372 4089 D8F2 FDB1 9C98
 From       : /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-25-x86_64
Is this ok [y/N]: y
Error: Cache-only enabled but no cache for 'fedora-cisco-openh264'

Running 'dnf makecache' immediately beforehand makes no difference.  However, if I add --disablerepo=fedora-cisco-openh264, then that invocation works.  I edited /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-cisco-openh264.repo to disable it permanently, and now fedora-review works.  It would be interesting to hear from the dnf developers why this is happening.

@Jerry James - Thanks for tracking this down - the workaround works for me.

Same here, thanks! I was getting exactly the same prompts with the GPG keys.

Should this bug be reassigned to the dnf component?

This might be a duplicate of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1247644

Indeed, fedora-cisco-openh264.repo contains the "repo_gpgcheck=1" line mentioned in bug 1247644.  Thanks Matthias.

FWIW, that workaround from comment #6 doesn't work for me:

  $ fedora-review -b 1457929 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64
  ...
  Warning: failed loading '/etc/yum.repos.d/sclo-postgresql96-testing.repo',
  skipping.
  Warning: failed loading '/etc/yum.repos.d/virtio-win.repo', skipping.
  Error: Cache-only enabled but no cache for 'updates'
  ...

  $ rpm -q mock fedora-review
  mock-1.3.4-1.fc25.noarch
  fedora-review-0.6.1-2.fc25.noarch

Since the fedora-review tool is basically unusable, I'm raising the
priority;  it is almost a year now?  This really complicates getting new
packages into Fedora :(.  Somebody (maybe dnf guys?) should have a look at
the bug.

This message is a reminder that Fedora 24 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 2 (two) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 24. It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time
this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora  'version'
of '24'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version'
to a later Fedora version.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not
able to fix it before Fedora 24 is end of life. If you would still like
to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version
of Fedora, you are encouraged  change the 'version' to a later Fedora
version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes
bugs or makes them obsolete.

Fedora 24 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2017-08-08. Fedora 24 is
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you
are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the
current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this
bug.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.

This is still an issue on Fedora 26 with:
dnf-2.7.5-1.fc26.noarch
fedora-review-0.6.1-6.fc26.noarch

The work-around from comment #6, namely to disable the fedora-cisco-openh264 repository globally by editing /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-cisco-openh264.repo, works from me.

I agree with Pavel Raiskup:

(In reply to Pavel Raiskup from comment #12)
> Since the fedora-review tool is basically unusable, I'm raising the
> priority;  it is almost a year now?  This really complicates getting new
> packages into Fedora :(.  Somebody (maybe dnf guys?) should have a look at
> the bug.

and I hope the underlying bug 1247644 gets fixed soon.

This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 28 development cycle.
Changing version to '28'.

I am experiencing this problem as well on Fedora 28.

This message is a reminder that Fedora 28 is nearing its end of life.
On 2019-May-28 Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for
Fedora 28. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases
that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as
EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '28'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not 
able to fix it before Fedora 28 is end of life. If you would still like 
to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version 
of Fedora, you are encouraged  change the 'version' to a later Fedora 
version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

Fedora 28 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2019-05-28. Fedora 28 is
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you
are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the
current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this
bug.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.