Hi;
Package kit informs me I need to upgrade the following: nss-3.12.6-1.2.fc12 (i686) nss-3.12.6-1.2.fc12 (x86_64) nss-ysyinit-3.12.6-1.2.fc12 (x86_64) nss-tools-3.12.6-1.2.fc12 (x86_64)
When I start the upgrade I get the following warning:
"No transaction to process"
and,
]# yum --skip-broken upgrade nss
Packages skipped because of dependency problems: nss-3.12.6-1.2.fc12.i686 from updates nss-3.12.6-1.2.fc12.x86_64 from updates nss-sysinit-3.12.6-1.2.fc12.x86_64 from updates nss-tools-3.12.6-1.2.fc12.x86_64 from updates
Do I just wait for repairs? Or, do I report this as a bug?
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 23:03 -0500, William Case wrote:
Hi;
Package kit informs me I need to upgrade the following: nss-3.12.6-1.2.fc12 (i686) nss-3.12.6-1.2.fc12 (x86_64) nss-ysyinit-3.12.6-1.2.fc12 (x86_64) nss-tools-3.12.6-1.2.fc12 (x86_64)
When I start the upgrade I get the following warning:
"No transaction to process"
and,
]# yum --skip-broken upgrade nss
Packages skipped because of dependency problems: nss-3.12.6-1.2.fc12.i686 from updates nss-3.12.6-1.2.fc12.x86_64 from updates nss-sysinit-3.12.6-1.2.fc12.x86_64 from updates nss-tools-3.12.6-1.2.fc12.x86_64 from updates
Do I just wait for repairs? Or, do I report this as a bug?
---- or you could read the e-mails today because this has been discussed many times already.
Craig
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 21:17 -0700, Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 23:03 -0500, William Case wrote:
Hi;
Do I just wait for repairs? Or, do I report this as a bug?
or you could read the e-mails today because this has been discussed many times already.
One thread with 5 responses does not make "many times already" particularly when the nss problem is buried in a long list of upgrade messages.
There was nothing about my original message that required sarcasm.
On Sat, 2010-03-13 at 00:19 -0500, William Case wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 21:17 -0700, Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 23:03 -0500, William Case wrote:
Hi;
Do I just wait for repairs? Or, do I report this as a bug?
or you could read the e-mails today because this has been discussed many times already.
One thread with 5 responses does not make "many times already" particularly when the nss problem is buried in a long list of upgrade messages.
There was nothing about my original message that required sarcasm.
---- agreed and there wasn't a single bit of sarcasm in my reply. It was genuine.
Just for the record... there were at least 3 separate threads today on this very subject (and one of their threads is also 5 messages)... Their 'subjects' were: yum depsolving problem: cause? solution? Dependencies problem while upgrading yum update failures
So the actual count was 18 messages on this very subject already today before you asked.
Yours is the fourth which basically means that you didn't bother to read the list mail (your prerogative), didn't bother checking the list for what was very recent discussion before asking (indicative of someone who is prone not to actually spend any time researching).
had you actually bothered to just Google the 3 words in your subject, 'nss update problem' and added fedora, you would have seen today's discussion on the first page and in fact, I notice now, yours is now on the first page of this specific Google search.
Do you want to keep discussing this?
Craig
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 23:19 -0700, Craig White wrote:
On Sat, 2010-03-13 at 00:19 -0500, William Case wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 21:17 -0700, Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 23:03 -0500, William Case wrote:
Hi;
Do I just wait for repairs? Or, do I report this as a bug?
or you could read the e-mails today because this has been discussed many times already.
One thread with 5 responses does not make "many times already" particularly when the nss problem is buried in a long list of upgrade messages.
There was nothing about my original message that required sarcasm.
agreed and there wasn't a single bit of sarcasm in my reply. It was genuine.
Just for the record... there were at least 3 separate threads today on this very subject (and one of their threads is also 5 messages)... Their 'subjects' were: yum depsolving problem: cause? solution? Dependencies problem while upgrading yum update failures
So the actual count was 18 messages on this very subject already today before you asked.
Yours is the fourth which basically means that you didn't bother to read the list mail (your prerogative), didn't bother checking the list for what was very recent discussion before asking (indicative of someone who is prone not to actually spend any time researching).
had you actually bothered to just Google the 3 words in your subject, 'nss update problem' and added fedora, you would have seen today's discussion on the first page and in fact, I notice now, yours is now on the first page of this specific Google search.
Do you want to keep discussing this?
You apparently do.
Your assumptions are wrong. Your count is wrong.
And, in case you might wish to use the word 'sarcasm' in the future, it means a keen, reproachful expression; a satirical remark uttered with some degree of scorn or contempt; a taunt; a gibe; a cutting jest. There is no implication of genuineness in its usage.
You know Craig, there is a general guideline for mail lists. If posted subjects don't interest you or they offend you, just move on.
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 23:03 -0500, William Case wrote:
Hi;
Package kit informs me I need to upgrade the following: nss-3.12.6-1.2.fc12 (i686) nss-3.12.6-1.2.fc12 (x86_64) nss-ysyinit-3.12.6-1.2.fc12 (x86_64) nss-tools-3.12.6-1.2.fc12 (x86_64)
When I start the upgrade I get the following warning:
"No transaction to process"
and,
]# yum --skip-broken upgrade nss
Packages skipped because of dependency problems: nss-3.12.6-1.2.fc12.i686 from updates nss-3.12.6-1.2.fc12.x86_64 from updates nss-sysinit-3.12.6-1.2.fc12.x86_64 from updates nss-tools-3.12.6-1.2.fc12.x86_64 from updates
Do I just wait for repairs? Or, do I report this as a bug?
It is not exactly a bug. The missing rpms are in the updates-testing repo. The person making the package had a time warp. No doubt sometime it will be fixed. Or you can enable updates-testing repo and get the installation to succeed. But then you will share the time warp.
-- ======================================================================= "Speed is subsittute fo accurancy." ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam@sbcglobal.net
On Sat, 2010-03-13 at 05:48 -0500, William Case wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 23:19 -0700, Craig White wrote:
On Sat, 2010-03-13 at 00:19 -0500, William Case wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 21:17 -0700, Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 23:03 -0500, William Case wrote:
Hi;
Do I just wait for repairs? Or, do I report this as a bug?
or you could read the e-mails today because this has been discussed many times already.
One thread with 5 responses does not make "many times already" particularly when the nss problem is buried in a long list of upgrade messages.
There was nothing about my original message that required sarcasm.
agreed and there wasn't a single bit of sarcasm in my reply. It was genuine.
Just for the record... there were at least 3 separate threads today on this very subject (and one of their threads is also 5 messages)... Their 'subjects' were: yum depsolving problem: cause? solution? Dependencies problem while upgrading yum update failures
So the actual count was 18 messages on this very subject already today before you asked.
Yours is the fourth which basically means that you didn't bother to read the list mail (your prerogative), didn't bother checking the list for what was very recent discussion before asking (indicative of someone who is prone not to actually spend any time researching).
had you actually bothered to just Google the 3 words in your subject, 'nss update problem' and added fedora, you would have seen today's discussion on the first page and in fact, I notice now, yours is now on the first page of this specific Google search.
Do you want to keep discussing this?
You apparently do.
Your assumptions are wrong. Your count is wrong.
And, in case you might wish to use the word 'sarcasm' in the future, it means a keen, reproachful expression; a satirical remark uttered with some degree of scorn or contempt; a taunt; a gibe; a cutting jest. There is no implication of genuineness in its usage.
You know Craig, there is a general guideline for mail lists. If posted subjects don't interest you or they offend you, just move on.
---- My assumptions?
Seems to me that I am not the one who ASSUMED sarcasm in my first reply but not only are you assuming it, you have gone so far as to give me a classical definition of the word sarcasm because YOU ASSUMED that I had a keen, reproachful expression, some scorn or contempt.
You asked what to do, I told you specifically to "read today's e-mails because it had been discussed many times already."
Then you wanted to suggest that only one thread and the topic was buried. When I pointed out that it was actually three separate threads and clearly very easy to find on Google - the first page of results using the same 3 key words from your subject.
Now if you want to pick on me if my count is wrong I'm ok with that but please don't toss the list guidelines in my face after you have just ignored the very first paragraph in the list guidelines...
*** http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines *** Before Posting to the List There are a number of ways you can find help within your system. If you don't find the answer there, try to look into the list archives before posting a question. This is a high volume list and chances are that someone has already had the same problem you are now trying to fix. See Useful Resources below for a list of places to try. Refer to this presentation on mail etiquette that you should follow. ***
Unfortunately, there isn't any 'no sniveling' clause in the list guidelines. Yes, my follow up e-mails on this topic do have some scorn and contempt because you seemingly couldn't appreciate that I gave you the answer you needed and had to embark on a self-serving crusade to save face rather than just admit that you didn't bother looking before posting to the list. If you want to ASSUME that this is sarcasm, fine. I consider it to be a genuine statement of my feelings on the matter.
Craig
--- On Fri, 3/12/10, William Case billlinux@rogers.com wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 21:17 -0700, Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 23:03 -0500, William Case
wrote:
Hi;
Do I just wait for repairs? Or, do I report this
as a bug?
or you could read the e-mails today because this has
been discussed many
times already.
One thread with 5 responses does not make "many times already" particularly when the nss problem is buried in a long list of upgrade messages.
There was nothing about my original message that required sarcasm.
To: OP
The nss dependency problem has been corrected. I checked this morning, Sat., the 13th, and updated with no problems.
FWIW, when I encounter such problems I usually just wait a couple of days to update. Usually by then the fix is in. If the "problem" persists for more than a week, then I know there's a real problem.
B
Hi;
On Sat, 2010-03-13 at 10:08 -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote:
--- On Fri, 3/12/10, William Case billlinux@rogers.com wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 21:17 -0700, Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 23:03 -0500, William Case
wrote:
To: OP
The nss dependency problem has been corrected. I checked this morning, Sat., the 13th, and updated with no problems.
Yes, I have now updated nss.
FWIW, when I encounter such problems I usually just wait a couple of days to update. Usually by then the fix is in. If the "problem" persists for more than a week, then I know there's a real problem.
B
I usually just wait as well. However, I have found that occasionally I am the first to encounter a rpm problem, so it might be useful to others to post a short concise warning message and check whether the problem has been reported yet.