On Sat, 2019-10-26 at 08:15 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 10/20/19 10:59 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2019-10-20 at 06:56 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> > On 10/18/19 2:31 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> > > On 10/18/19 2:05 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > > I might need more logs from your case to be sure of what's going
> > > > if you could put the dnf logs and system journals up somewhere
> > > > help. Also, did you re-run the download phase after updating the
> > > > system-upgrade plugin? You do need to do that...
> > > Yes, I ran "dnf system-upgrade clean" as well as "dnf clean
packages" for good measure.
> > >
> > > > The change I put in last week fixes the case I diagnosed, but I mean
> > > > it's still possible there's some other case where the
> > > > up different for sure. Will need data to figure it out though.
> > > OK....
> > >
> > > journal is at
> > > dnf log is at
> > >
> > And for the record I have added to
> Sorry Ed, got sidelined by other stuff. But I need the dnf log from the
> download transaction as well, to compare the two. Can you find that one
> too? Thanks!
As you know, I did supply the requested logs in the BZ.
The issue I reported seems either not to have been considered or is irrelevant to 178588.
It's definitely not the *same* as that bug, because it involves a
package that the download transaction omits but the upgrade transaction
decides to 'reinstall'. To figure it out we'd need to figure out why
the update transaction decides that package needs to be reinstalled, I
guess, but I did not have time to do that last week; f31 blockers took
So, I think others may encounter the same issue. Should a new BZ be
created? Or, will
there be an advisory to erase the offending packages and manually reinstall after the
Filing a new bug wouldn't hurt, for sure. Thanks. Probably against dnf-
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net