Description of problem:
Gnome-shell notifies of updates; I've tried restart & install from gnome-software as well as checking install pending updates from the gnome-shell reboot dialog. The updates are not applied.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
1. See above.
journalctl -b-1 contains this entry
[ 7.955568] f25h pk-offline-update: failed to update system: cannot update repo 'fedora-cisco-openh264': Cannot download repomd.xml: Cannot download repodata/repomd.xml: All mirrors were tried
It should update. This repo works fine for dnf, and it's been enabled the whole time I've had Fedora 25 installed without this being a problem; and besides shouldn't all packages already be downloaded? Why does pk-offline-update try to update repo in the first place? There isn't even network services.
Created attachment 1236142 [details]
Set params: systemd.log_level=debug rd.debug
Can you try if https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-3189d3a4df fixes this, please?
That is one of the updates in /var/cache/PackageKit that's not being applied by pk-offline-update; however if manually applied with dnf and rebooting, now offline updates happen without error.
Does the problem with 1.1.4-2 affect only certain repos? Since there's no notification of update failure after rebooting, users may not notice this for a while.
I don't know if it affects only certain repos. It does sound like this from your description; I don't have any more insight.
1.1.5-0.1 fixed a somewhat similar issue with the virtualbox repo; would have been nice to hear if this fixed your issue but I guess we'll not find it out now that you applied the updates with dnf.
Let me know if you can reproduce this in the future. Thanks!
(In reply to Kalev Lember from comment #4)
> 1.1.5-0.1 fixed a somewhat similar issue with the virtualbox repo; would
> have been nice to hear if this fixed your issue but I guess we'll not find
> it out now that you applied the updates with dnf.
I only updated PackageKit with dnf. How else would I have updated it?
Ahh, I see! Sorry. I thought you did a whole system update.
OK, in that case it sounds like it's fixed with 1.1.5-0.1.