- Original Message -
> From: "Michael Schwendt"
> To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 2:01:27 PM
> Subject: Re: More dnf annoyance
>
> On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 11:51:47 + (UTC), Andreas M. Kirchwitz wrote:
>
> > >&
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 11:51:47 + (UTC), Andreas M. Kirchwitz wrote:
> >> "dnf --refresh" is more like "dnf clean expire-cache", which sometimes
> >> gives additional updates to plain "dnf upgrade", but there still seems
> >> some caching involved that keeps it from providing all updates availabl
Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> "dnf --refresh" is more like "dnf clean expire-cache", which sometimes
>> gives additional updates to plain "dnf upgrade", but there still seems
>> some caching involved that keeps it from providing all updates available.
>
> Doubtful.
>
> "dnf update --refresh" here (R
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 13:21:49 + (UTC), Andreas M. Kirchwitz wrote:
> "dnf --refresh" is more like "dnf clean expire-cache", which sometimes
> gives additional updates to plain "dnf upgrade", but there still seems
> some caching involved that keeps it from providing all updates available.
Doubt
Heinz Diehl wrote:
> F22, in short: first running "dnf --refresh upgrade" shows some new
> packets. Then "dnf clean all" followed by "dnf --refresh upgrade"
> shows the same packets to be updated, and *some more*.
Yes, you are correct. Several people have verified this behavior,
they reported th
On 08/11/2015 04:53 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 04:35:56PM +0200, Heinz Diehl wrote:
Yet two completely separate contacts with Fedora's metalink server.
Trouble-shooting these kinds of problems would need to include a closer
look at what mirrors you are assigned to in both
On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 15:42 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 08/11/2015 01:32 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 13:13 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > On 08/11/2015 12:51 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 10:35 +0200, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> > > > >
On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 15:41 +0200, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> On 11.08.2015, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>
> > So two update commands at different times give different results?
>
> If "two update commands issued directly after another" qualify as "at
> different times", then yes. In fact, there was not
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 04:35:56PM +0200, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> > Yet two completely separate contacts with Fedora's metalink server.
> > Trouble-shooting these kinds of problems would need to include a closer
> > look at what mirrors you are assigned to in both cases.
> Ok, I see. So what command s
On 11.08.2015, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Yet two completely separate contacts with Fedora's metalink server.
> Trouble-shooting these kinds of problems would need to include a closer
> look at what mirrors you are assigned to in both cases.
Ok, I see. So what command should I use to keep my sy
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 15:41:35 +0200, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> On 11.08.2015, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>
> > So two update commands at different times give different results?
>
> If "two update commands issued directly after another" qualify as "at
> different times", then yes. In fact, there was n
On 08/11/2015 01:32 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 13:13 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 08/11/2015 12:51 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 10:35 +0200, Heinz Diehl wrote:
F22, in short: first running "dnf --refresh upgrade" shows some
new
packets. Then
On 11.08.2015, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> So two update commands at different times give different results?
If "two update commands issued directly after another" qualify as "at
different times", then yes. In fact, there was not more than max. one
minute between the two.
> > Dnf hasn't been w
On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 13:13 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 08/11/2015 12:51 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 10:35 +0200, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> > > F22, in short: first running "dnf --refresh upgrade" shows some
> > > new
> > > packets. Then "dnf clean all" followed by "d
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 12:50:02 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> Last Sunday, I've had a case, where I resorted to
> rm -rf /var/cache/dnf
> because neither "dnf clean all" nor "dnf --refresh" seems to have worked.
>
> No matter what I did dnf seems have refetched the same outdated mirror
> presentin
On 08/11/2015 12:51 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 10:35 +0200, Heinz Diehl wrote:
F22, in short: first running "dnf --refresh upgrade" shows some new
packets. Then "dnf clean all" followed by "dnf --refresh upgrade"
shows the same packets to be updated, and *some more*.
On 08/11/2015 12:16 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:35:04 +0200
Heinz Diehl wrote:
F22, in short: first running "dnf --refresh upgrade" shows some new
packets. Then "dnf clean all" followed by "dnf --refresh upgrade"
shows the same packets to be updated, and *some more*.
Last Su
On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 10:35 +0200, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> F22, in short: first running "dnf --refresh upgrade" shows some new
> packets. Then "dnf clean all" followed by "dnf --refresh upgrade"
> shows the same packets to be updated, and *some more*.
So two update commands at different times give di
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:35:04 +0200
Heinz Diehl wrote:
> F22, in short: first running "dnf --refresh upgrade" shows some new
> packets. Then "dnf clean all" followed by "dnf --refresh upgrade"
> shows the same packets to be updated, and *some more*.
I don't think that's new with dnf. I've seen sim
Hi,
F22, in short: first running "dnf --refresh upgrade" shows some new
packets. Then "dnf clean all" followed by "dnf --refresh upgrade"
shows the same packets to be updated, and *some more*.
Dnf hasn't been working properly since F22, while I had not a single
problem with yum ever. Still I have
20 matches
Mail list logo
