LinuxQuestions.org
Visit Jeremy's Blog.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Password
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 03-10-2009, 09:42 AM   #1
majorlinux
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Dec 2007
Location: Greensboro, NC
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 8

Rep: Reputation: 0
Public Key for NetworkManager


When I tried updating Fedora 10 this morning, both with yum and with the graphical updater, I have been getting this error:

Code:
warning: rpmts_HdrFromFdno: Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 4ebfc273


Public key for NetworkManager-glib-0.7.0.99-3.fc10.i386.rpm is not installed
Does anyone know what this means and how to fix it? Its only hindering the updates, but I would really like to get it fixed ASAP.
 
Old 03-10-2009, 10:21 AM   #2
fierywater
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Distribution: Fedora 10
Posts: 1

Rep: Reputation: 0
I'm having the same problem with my Fedora 10 updater. Same file, same error. I'll let you know if I come up with anything.
 
Old 03-10-2009, 10:30 AM   #3
vonedaddy
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2004
Location: Philadelphia,PA
Posts: 177

Rep: Reputation: 17
I can not offer an explanation but I can tell you how to get around it.


Code:
yum --nogpgcheck update
 
Old 03-10-2009, 10:43 AM   #4
24seven
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 3

Rep: Reputation: 1
Worked for me.

Though it might be safer to allow the PGP check on the other updates:
Code:
yum --nogpgcheck update NetworkManager
yup update

Last edited by 24seven; 03-10-2009 at 10:50 AM.
 
Old 03-10-2009, 11:18 AM   #5
shaolin77
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2004
Distribution: Fedora and Ubuntu
Posts: 42

Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by 24seven View Post
Worked for me.

Though it might be safer to allow the PGP check on the other updates:
Code:
yum --nogpgcheck update NetworkManager
yup update
I'm getting the following when attempting to update
:
Public key for NetworkManager-glib-0.7.0.99-3.fc10.i386.rpm is not installedv

and I ended up bypassing the following:


NetworkManager VPN plugin for OpenVPN
NetworkManager VPN plugin for vpnc
Libraries for adding NetworkManager support to applications that use glib
GNOME applications for use with NetworkManager
Network connection manager and user applications

so that the other updates can be applied...I've seen others are having the same issue on the other forums.. once resolve you can apply the updates that have not been applied, but at least you have the others installed if you bypass the following mentioned above.
 
Old 03-10-2009, 12:27 PM   #6
spurster
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 1

Rep: Reputation: 1
Maybe a messed up signature

When I do:

Code:
rpm -qip NetworkManager-0.7.0.99-3.fc10.i386.rpm
One of the lines starts with:

Code:
Signature   : DSA/8
On other .rpm files that I have checked, the same line starts with:

Code:
Signature   : DSA/SHA1
I think I will wait before I force this update.
 
Old 03-10-2009, 02:05 PM   #7
custangro
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Location: California
Distribution: Fedora , CentOS , Solaris 10, RHEL
Posts: 1,931
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 177Reputation: 177
FWIW...

I found this to be helpful....

Code:
root@fedora# yum -y update  --nogpgcheck
-C
 
Old 03-10-2009, 05:14 PM   #8
JulianTosh
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Distribution: Fedora / CentOS
Posts: 674
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 90
A safer method (for now) is to exclude NetworkManager* until we figure out why the signature does not work:

Code:
yum -y -x NetworkManager* update
 
Old 03-10-2009, 06:22 PM   #9
keith langett
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2

Rep: Reputation: 0
Hey!! Thanks for the thread to help me update the public key on my FC10 box. this really worked >>
yum --nogpgcheck update NetworkManager
yup update

Keith langett
 
Old 03-10-2009, 07:01 PM   #10
UncleBubba
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2004
Location: Richmond, Virginia, USA
Distribution: Fedora, CentOS
Posts: 2

Rep: Reputation: 0
Exclamation Be Careful About Bypassing The GPG Check

Y'all be careful about bypassing the GPG signature check on update packages. While this one is probably an innocent error, a failed signature check could indicate a package that was changed after it was signed.

If that's the case, you really have no way of knowing what is in the package you're installing on your system--it could be anything.

Just be careful...
 
Old 03-10-2009, 07:21 PM   #11
custangro
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Location: California
Distribution: Fedora , CentOS , Solaris 10, RHEL
Posts: 1,931
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 177Reputation: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by UncleBubba View Post
Y'all be careful about bypassing the GPG signature check on update packages. While this one is probably an innocent error, a failed signature check could indicate a package that was changed after it was signed.

If that's the case, you really have no way of knowing what is in the package you're installing on your system--it could be anything.

Just be careful...
Yes, you are right! And I would _never_ do this on a production machine....EVER

That being said...

I have Fedora 10 installed on my laptop that has nothing that I will miss...it's my "messing around" machine...

But you are right UncleBubba... BE CAREFUL!

-C
 
Old 03-10-2009, 11:35 PM   #12
majorlinux
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Dec 2007
Location: Greensboro, NC
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 8

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by vonedaddy View Post
I can not offer an explanation but I can tell you how to get around it.


Code:
yum --nogpgcheck update
This worked for me as well. Will be careful about the unsigned packages. Thanks everyone for helping me out with that.
 
Old 03-11-2009, 02:34 AM   #13
jman82s
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2007
Location: Central Coast, California
Distribution: "distro-hopper"
Posts: 64

Rep: Reputation: 15
For anyone confused, it was indeed an innocent error:

"Hi

Release Engineering team has the following announcement:

"Several of you have reported issues with the F-9 and F-10
NetworkManager updates that were pushed last night (March 9)
related to an incorrect GPG key. The error output looked like:

Public key for NetworkManager-0.7.0.99-3.fc10.i386.rpm is not installed

However the key it was signed with was apparently the proper F9 or F10
GPG key.

This issue has been resolved for F-10 updates, and will be resolved for
F-9 updates relatively soon. In an effort for full discloser, I've
included a description of the events that caused this below."

More here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedo.../msg00004.html

I held off on updating until I had an official explanation.
 
Old 03-11-2009, 09:05 AM   #14
24seven
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 3

Rep: Reputation: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman82s View Post
For anyone confused, it was indeed an innocent error:

"Hi

Release Engineering team has the following announcement:

"Several of you have reported issues with the F-9 and F-10
NetworkManager updates that were pushed last night (March 9)
related to an incorrect GPG key. The error output looked like:

Public key for NetworkManager-0.7.0.99-3.fc10.i386.rpm is not installed

However the key it was signed with was apparently the proper F9 or F10
GPG key.

This issue has been resolved for F-10 updates, and will be resolved for
F-9 updates relatively soon. In an effort for full discloser, I've
included a description of the events that caused this below."

More here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedo.../msg00004.html

I held off on updating until I had an official explanation.
Confirmed - a normal update is now possible
 
Old 03-11-2009, 05:08 PM   #15
UncleBubba
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2004
Location: Richmond, Virginia, USA
Distribution: Fedora, CentOS
Posts: 2

Rep: Reputation: 0
Smile Yep, seems all better now.

I was able to successfully update three F10 systems without incident. I also checked several--but by no means all--of the distribution mirrors and saw no trace of the old package.

I did have one problem when yum apparently tried to use the copy already in its cache to do the update. Running the following from the command line deletes non-installed packaged from the cache and resolved the problem for me (and may save someone some time):

sudo yum clean packages

(Yeah, I thought yum would detect the updated server package automatically but I don't want to spend time figuring out whether it was yum or a loose nut behind my keyboard...)
 
  


Reply

Tags
error, fedora, update, yum


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Public key, private key explained calande Linux - Security 3 06-12-2008 05:23 AM
Revoking GPG key with only passphrase and public key djib Linux - Security 2 03-13-2007 03:20 AM
public key not available? buwaleed Debian 4 01-04-2006 04:52 PM
GPG Data, Secret Key but no Public Key? Aeiri Linux - Software 5 07-20-2004 06:00 PM
RSA public key encryption/private key decription koningshoed Linux - Security 1 08-08-2002 07:25 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:16 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration