Bug 628114

Summary: Manual confirmation of signature leads to error
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: tim <tim>
Component: PackageKitAssignee: Richard Hughes <rhughes>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: high Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 13CC: jonathan, rhughes, sangu.fedora, smparrish
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-09-23 08:34:23 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description tim 2010-08-28 00:27:44 UTC
Description of problem:
When installing software from rpmfusion, I need to explicitly specify I trust the source of the packages (for instance the lame-libs-3.98.3-1.fc13.i686) from rpmfusion-free. When I do this, I am asked for root authentication. After I enter my root password, the progress indicator flashes shortly and then nothing happens. It turns out the installation has failed.
When I try to start this process from "Movie Player", about the same process happens, except I get a detailed error message in the end. (Can't we just call it 'Totem' in the menu? I want my "I've used linux before and don't want noob terms' switch.. ;o) )

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Guessing this could be gpk-application 2.30.3

How reproducible:
Very

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Enable the rpmfusion-free repository (but don't install the signature key's for the packages in the repository)
2. Search for the lame-libs-3.98.3-1.fc13.i686 package (but I think any package of which the key is not installed would do the trick)
3. Install it, answering that the source is trusted.
4. Pass the root password to confirm that the signature should be considered trusted.
5. Notice there is no error message, but no confirmation either.
6. Try the same process, by opening an mp3 file or stream in Totem, but now an error message is displayed.
  
Additional info:

Details, error log:
failed to install signature: Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/share/PackageKit/helpers/yum/yumBackend.py", line 2926, in install_signature
    self.yumbase.getKeyForPackage(pkg, askcb = lambda x, y, z: True)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/yum/__init__.py", line 4329, in getKeyForPackage
    result = ts.pgpImportPubkey(misc.procgpgkey(info['raw_key']))
  File "/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/rpmUtils/transaction.py", line 59, in __getattr__
    return self.getMethod(attr)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/rpmUtils/transaction.py", line 69, in getMethod
    return getattr(self.ts, method)
AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'pgpImportPubkey'

Comment 1 tim 2010-08-28 00:47:59 UTC
Maybe I should note that I installed Fedora 13 from a LinuxFormat (magazine) disk and I installed all updates I could find. This happened shortly after the reboot that was needed for the updates.

Comment 2 tim 2010-08-29 01:02:51 UTC
The problem can be worked around by manually installing the rpmfusion signature using a download from it's website and installing it using
  su -c 'rpm --import RPM-GPG-KEY-rpmfusion-free-fedora-13'

But this is only a way to work around the problem found here. Maybe there are actually two problems at work here:

1. The rpmfusion repo doesn't install correctly from it's RPM, because the key is not correctly imported. (whether this is a problem with the rpmfusion rpm or with the install functionality is a subject for an other discussion, I'd say. It's not within my power to analyse this to know for sure.)

2. Using the PackageKit UI to confirm that the key is to be trusted, does not work because of the above mentioned error log. (I don't know enough python and don't know enough about fedora's inner workings to figure this one out though..)

Comment 3 Richard Hughes 2010-09-23 08:34:23 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 622179 ***