On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Fabio Jara <ronintekorei@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello Patel
This last comment was just for some people to notice that sometimes the
On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 11:58 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 11:37 -0400, Fabio Jara wrote:
> > Hello Patel,
> >
> > On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 08:12 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 08:03 -0400, Fabio Jara wrote:
> > > > > I hope Tim (ignored_mailbox) will not see your advice. He recently
> > > > was
> > > > > very angry about yum clean all. Now it's forbidden to give such
> > > > advice
> > > > > ;-)
> > > > Why is that? that worked for me two times in a row now, why is it
> > > > forbidden? O_o For future reference.
> > >
> > > The only reason to use "yum clean all" instead of "yum clean metadata"
> > > is if you're running out of space because of cached packages. Then you
> > > get to waste bandwidth (not to mention server resources) downloading
> > > them again.
> > >
> > > "yum clean metadata" has solved every problem I've ever had that "yum
> > > clean all" would have solved. I would be interested to hear *reasoned*
> > > argument about why this might not always be the case (apart from the
> > > disk space issue already mentioned).
> >
> > A while ago i try to update my notebook with yum, and for some reason
> > there was a conflict between the kmod-nvidia driver and another package.
> > So i did all the normal methods that the error suggest me, also yum
> > clean metadata. But when i try to update the same error got me again, so
> > i got wild and type yum clean all. Try again and it work! So, that's why
> > i suggested to do the same. :)
> >
> >
> > I think that with the package-cleanup --problems and the --dupes
> > something was still there, so the clean all remove it.
>
> That would indicate a bug in "yum clean metadata". If this happens again
> you should report it.
>
> In any case the sequence "yum clean metadata" and only if that doesn't
> work then "yum clean all" is perfectly reasonable.
>
> > And a short time ago i was having almost the same issue, i asked for
> > help in the mailing list, and the problem this time was that the package
> > have been updated in the mirror but not it's dependencies. So after a
> > couple of days the error wasn't there anymore.
>
> I don't see the relevance of this last comment. If the package
> dependencies haven't been updated in a mirror, neither "clean all" nor
> "clean metadata" is going to fix the problem.
error seems to be the same if the dependencies aren't ready yet, but
these errors are not the same.
>
> poc
>
My best regards.
So I had a similar issue for the pst week on my desktop machine. At some point updates did not get applied right. Either I accidentally rebooted the system while updating or something else messed up. I could not update several of the packages that claimed they were missing files or prerequisites. If you run " rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest" and you see "Unsatisfied dependencies" error messages, then you might have the same issue I had.
Now if that is the case you will need to re-download and reinstall the software and you might have to force the re-install of those packages. Now you should just have to re-download the dependancies of the packages you need to get everything updated to the current level.
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
