Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
On a new installation of Rawhide, a public key is not installed for the openh264 package. DNF displays the following after downloading all new package updates: Running transaction Transaction failed: Signature verification failed. Public key "file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-rawhide-x86_64" is already present, not importing. OpenPGP check for package "openh264-2.4.1-2.fc42.x86_64" (/var/cache/libdnf5/fedora-cisco-openh264-4896e02bbb10d47b/packages/openh264-2.4.1-2.fc42.x86_64.rpm) from repo "fedora-cisco-openh264" has failed: Public key is not installed. As is, this prevents Rawhide from being updated. If this repo is disabled, Rawhide will then update without including openh264 and mozilla-openh264 from the same repo. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.Run 'dnf upgrade'. 2.Information is updated, new packages are downloaded. 3.dnf proceeds to run transaction, the displays above information pertaining to the openh264 package. Actual Results: Information displayed as above, Rawhide will not update unless the openh264 repo is disabled, because of the public key not installed for this package. Expected Results: Package should have public key allowing for the package to be installed.
This is a releng issue - each time after rawhide is branched, releng needs to send a new openh264 build to Cisco for hosting. I've built openh264-2.5.0-1.fc43 and asked releng to ship it, see https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12592
This package has changed maintainer in Fedora. Reassigning to the new maintainer of this component.
The problem is back with today's rawhide (Fedora 46): ``` $ podman run --pull=always -it --rm registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide Trying to pull registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide... Getting image source signatures Copying blob 7ecb98935d91 done | Copying config b4bbd926b9 done | Writing manifest to image destination [root@71d65f55708b /]# dnf install openh264 Updating and loading repositories: Fedora rawhide openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64 100% | 4.3 KiB/s | 5.3 KiB | 00m01s Fedora - Rawhide - Developmental packages for the next Fedora release 100% | 4.3 MiB/s | 21.8 MiB | 00m05s Repositories loaded. Package Arch Version Repository Size Installing: openh264 x86_64 0:2.6.0-3.fc45 fedora-cisco-openh264 1.1 MiB Transaction Summary: Installing: 1 package Total size of inbound packages is 435 KiB. Need to download 435 KiB. After this operation, 1 MiB extra will be used (install 1 MiB, remove 0 B). Is this ok [y/N]: y [1/1] openh264-0:2.6.0-3.fc45.x86_64 100% | 1.0 MiB/s | 435.0 KiB | 00m00s ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [1/1] Total 100% | 761.9 KiB/s | 435.0 KiB | 00m01s Running transaction Importing OpenPGP key 0x91211FCE: UserID : "Fedora (46) <fedora-46-primary>" Fingerprint: D924B10D3E810DABDD8B56B596E7E91491211FCE From : file:///usr/share/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Is this ok [y/N]: y The key was successfully imported. Transaction failed: Signature verification failed. OpenPGP check for package "openh264-2.6.0-3.fc45.x86_64" (/var/cache/libdnf5/fedora-cisco-openh264-4896e02bbb10d47b/packages/openh264-2.6.0-3.fc45.x86_64.rpm) from repo "fedora-cisco-openh264" has failed: Import of the key didn't help, wrong key? ```
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora Linux 45 development cycle. Changing version to 45.
Confirming. This is a regression against the same dnf command in a registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:44 container, and also against registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:45 where the installation seems to pass as well. Should this be reported against the distribution component, Fedora Container Images product, or perhaps https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets? Getting https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=fedora-cisco-openh264-rawhide&arch=x86_64 the single URL element is <url protocol="https" type="https" location="US" preference="100">https://codecs.fedoraproject.org/openh264/45/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml</url> which has 45 in the version so no wonder the package is signed with 45 keys. Where should this be tracked?
Ah, this seems to be tracked as https://forge.fedoraproject.org/releng/tickets/issues/13466, for over two weeks already.
Based on Adrian's comment in https://forge.fedoraproject.org/releng/tickets/issues/13466#issuecomment-1353722, I checked that podman run --rm -ti registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide dnf install -y openh264 now passes.