Description of problem: DNF started updating then there was a power failure and now the system does not want to continue with the upgrade. Did a dnf system-upgrade clean and restarted the upgrade process but now it stalls and does not even allow package download, let alone the upgrade process. Please assist. How reproducible: haven't tried to reproduce, just want to upgrade! Steps to Reproduce: 1. sudo dnf upgrade --refresh 2. sudo dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=27 --allowerasing 3. sudo dnf system-upgrade reboot DNF identified circa 5800 packages to update 4. power failure circa 2400 packages 5. multiple attempts to restart upgrade process through step 3. 6. attempted process restart from step 1, did not work 7. sudo dnf system-upgrade clean 8. attempted step 2. failed. Actual results: Current output from system as below [user-@localhost ~]$ sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=27 --refresh --allowerasing Before you continue ensure that your system is fully upgraded by running "dnf --refresh upgrade". Do you want to continue [y/N]: y Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:00 ago on Sat 18 Nov 2017 09:42:03 AEDT. Error: Problem: The operation would result in removing the following protected packages: dnf, sudo, systemd, systemd-udev
Hi, there is post on dnf team blog about repairing broken system using dnf. https://rpm-software-management.github.io/page2/ (sorry for inconvenience, we have new blog system and permanent links to posts are not working at the time, just search for title "Repair of broken system with DNF-2.0") You probably do not need to boot from live cd and upgrade dnf, because fedora 26 already contains required version 2. Basically you can try "dnf check" and see if there are some duplicate packages, which you need to remove.
I had the same issue upgrading from F27 to F28 using dnf. This is the scenario which was left behind, which dnf tools weren't able to resolve: * Both fc27 and fc28 packages were "installed" according to "rpm -qa". * On disk, some content was still F27, some F28. This could *possibly* be investigated case by case with "rpm -V" (to determine which of the two is already on disk, to purge the other entry from the database). * It's unclear which packages' %pre / %post scripts had already run. * No dnf tools were capable of resolving any of this. So probably an unresolvable situation, unless someone comes up with a method to avoid such a mess at random power failure. I needed to reinstall, which was a good (but painful) refresh for my system.
Please can you try "dnf remove --duplicates"? It will automatically try to resolve your issue.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 27 is nearing its end of life. On 2018-Nov-30 Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 27. 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 '27'. 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 27 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.
(In reply to Jaroslav Mracek from comment #3) > Please can you try "dnf remove --duplicates"? It will automatically try to > resolve your issue. I can't, because I finally reinstalled. I must point out that none of the fedoraproject.org (and similar) pages covering this topic even mentioned that command. (This one comes close, I hadn't found it at that time - and I had the same conflicts, and it wasn't obvious to me that I needed to disable a plugin to work around that: https://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?314473-dnf-broke-fedora-25-after-crash-during-update )
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 30 development cycle. Changing version to '30.
I believe that "dnf remove --duplicates" will solve the issue next time. Anyway we will provide additional improvements how to recover the system including a new tools. But the present issue was resolved therefore closing the bug.
I have a similar problem, caused by a crash due to system instability during cleanup phase of system upgrade from fedora 30 to 31. The packages were all upgraded, but cleanup did not complete. or post install. the log simply terminates during cleanup, I was not watching. The system is bootable and usable, with an f30 kernel, no f31 listed at boot time retrying dnf system-upgrade reboot results in dnf believing the system is upgraded, and hanging at reboot. dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=31 results in the problem message about protected packages dnf remove --duplicates --skip-broken produces a large number of messages about f31 packages like: installed package efibootmgr-16-6.fc31.x86_64 not available. with these messages about f30 packages: Error: Problem 1: package libdnf-0.35.5-4.fc30.x86_64 requires librpm.so.8()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package libdnf-0.35.5-4.fc30.x86_64 requires librpmio.so.8()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - conflicting requests Problem 2: problem with installed package yum-4.2.9-5.fc31.noarch - package yum-3.4.3-522.fc30.noarch requires python2-gpg, but none of the providers can be installed - package yum-3.4.3-521.fc30.noarch requires python2-gpg, but none of the providers can be installed - package yum-4.2.9-5.fc31.noarch requires dnf = 4.2.9-5.fc31, but none of the providers can be installed - package python2-gpg-1.12.0-1.fc30.x86_64 requires gpgme(x86-64) = 1.12.0-1.fc30, but none of the providers can be installed - conflicting requests Problem 3: package PackageKit-1.1.12-11.fc31.x86_64 requires libdnf(x86-64) >= 0.22.0, but none of the providers can be installed - package PackageKit-1.1.12-11.fc31.x86_64 requires libdnf.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package libdnf-0.35.5-4.fc30.x86_64 requires librpm.so.8()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package libdnf-0.35.5-4.fc30.x86_64 requires librpmio.so.8()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package rpm-libs-4.14.2.1-4.fc30.1.x86_64 requires rpm = 4.14.2.1-4.fc30.1, but none of the providers can be installed - package rpm-libs-4.14.2.1-5.fc30.x86_64 requires rpm = 4.14.2.1-5.fc30, but none of the providers can be installed - problem with installed package PackageKit-1.1.12-11.fc31.x86_64 - conflicting requests I will read the github about repairing broken system with dnf, and defer nuking the system and re-installing pending any response to this post. Or learning something about dnf.