Bug 2401745 - /usr/lib/firmware/vpu_p.bin.xz: broken symbolic link to mediatek/mt8173/vpu_p.bin.xz
Summary: /usr/lib/firmware/vpu_p.bin.xz: broken symbolic link to mediatek/mt8173/vpu_p...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: linux-firmware
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: David Woodhouse
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2025-10-06 03:48 UTC by John Dodson
Modified: 2026-05-21 23:20 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version: linux-firmware-20260519-1.fc44
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2026-05-21 23:20:43 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description John Dodson 2025-10-06 03:48:57 UTC
I am sad to report that,

/usr/lib/firmware/vpu_p.bin.xz: broken symbolic link to mediatek/mt8173/vpu_p.bin.xz

it is claimed to be owned by,

linux-firmware-20250917-2.fc42.noarch

Obviously I do not have the package that I expect contains the target installed.
(mediatek-firmware.noarch 20250917-2.fc42?)



Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Wait for linux-firmware-20250917-2.fc42.noarch to be installed.
2. file /usr/lib/firmware/vpu_d.bin.xz
3.
Actual Results:
file /usr/lib/firmware/vpu_d.bin.xz
/usr/lib/firmware/vpu_p.bin.xz: broken symbolic link to mediatek/mt8173/vpu_p.bin.xz


Expected Results:
No broken symlink, where the package that controls the target maintains
the symlink.

Comment 1 John Dodson 2025-12-02 12:04:56 UTC
upped to fc43

Comment 2 John Dodson 2026-04-12 05:46:01 UTC
Can we perhaps add aome kind of procedural advice for all such packaging/symlink creation?

ie. that the package that controls the target ALWAYS maintains the symlink?

Comment 3 John Dodson 2026-04-24 03:07:07 UTC
Still broken in linux-firmware-20260410-1.fc43.noarch

Comment 4 John Dodson 2026-05-13 12:03:12 UTC
Still broken in FC44

Comment 5 Peter Robinson 2026-05-13 12:14:13 UTC
Correct, which is why this bug is still open, no need to comment. It will be fixed in the May release.

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2026-05-19 20:08:00 UTC
FEDORA-2026-2b07c67f06 (linux-firmware-20260519-1.fc44) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 44.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-2b07c67f06

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2026-05-19 20:08:10 UTC
FEDORA-2026-16c8693020 (linux-firmware-20260519-1.fc43) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 43.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-16c8693020

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2026-05-20 01:23:01 UTC
FEDORA-2026-2b07c67f06 has been pushed to the Fedora 44 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2026-2b07c67f06`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-2b07c67f06

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2026-05-20 01:39:59 UTC
FEDORA-2026-16c8693020 has been pushed to the Fedora 43 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2026-16c8693020`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-16c8693020

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2026-05-21 23:20:43 UTC
FEDORA-2026-2b07c67f06 (linux-firmware-20260519-1.fc44) has been pushed to the Fedora 44 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.