updting issue with

GRS63 · 05-03-2020, 02:33 AM

Gnome desktop 64 bit currently Fedora 31. ASUS Laptop. Fedora 31 rans fine but can not get past the fist command in the upgrade process ad outined in the Fedora upgrade process.

The system was updated regularly but to start the upgrade process I issued the command

Code:

sudo dnf upgrade --referesh

.
After inserting the password I get;

Code:

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/bin/dnf", line 57, in <module>
    from dnf.cli import main
  File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/__init__.py", line 30, in <module>
    import dnf.base
  File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/base.py", line 29, in <module>
    import libdnf.transaction
  File "/usr/lib64/python3.7/site-packages/libdnf/__init__.py", line 13, in <module>
    from . import module
  File "/usr/lib64/python3.7/site-packages/libdnf/module.py", line 13, in <module>
    from . import _module
ImportError: /usr/lib64/python3.7/site-packages/libdnf/_module.so: undefined symbol: libdnf_error

not sure if it is a Python issue or a DNF issue. Any ideas on how to fix this?

shruggy · 05-03-2020, 03:39 AM

Probably won't help, but still worth a try:

Code:

sudo dnf -C reinstall python3-libdnf

GRS63 · 05-03-2020, 05:45 AM

tried your suggestion
the following was returned

dnf -C reinstall python3-libdnf
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/dnf", line 57, in <module>
from dnf.cli import main
File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/__init__.py", line 30, in <module>
import dnf.base
File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/base.py", line 29, in <module>
import libdnf.transaction
File "/usr/lib64/python3.7/site-packages/libdnf/__init__.py", line 13, in <module>
from . import module
File "/usr/lib64/python3.7/site-packages/libdnf/module.py", line 13, in <module>
from . import _module
ImportError: /usr/lib64/python3.7/site-packages/libdnf/_module.so: undefined symbol: libdnf_error

shruggy · 05-03-2020, 06:35 AM

Well, the -C option of dnf only works for non-root operations, so using it here was unnecessary and a mistake on my part.

Temporarily setting metadata_expire to sufficiently large value (say 30d), then trying to reinstall python3-libdnf is 1) too much hassle and 2) not guaranteed to work either.

So at this point, I'd just download python3-libdnf from Fedora 31 repo and reinstall it with rpm. But there're python3-libdnf-0.35.3-6.fc31.x86_64.rpm as well as python3-libdnf-0.47.0-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm. Which one have you installed? Please show the output of

Code:

rpm -q python3-libdnf

GRS63 · 05-04-2020, 01:42 AM

Thanks
I get the following

Quote:

# rpm -q python3-libdnf
python3-libdnf-0.43.1-5.fc31.x86_64
python3-libdnf-0.47.0-1.fc31.x86_64

it appear there are two libdnf versions I guess thereis some sort of clash going on.

shruggy · 05-04-2020, 02:35 AM

Yes, seems so. Looks like an upgrade of dnf itself failed. Please show the output of

Code:

sudo dnf -q history python3-libdnf

and

Code:

sudo dnf -q history info ID

replacing ID with the latest transaction ID from the first command.

GRS63 · 05-04-2020, 04:37 AM

Thanks.
Did not get very far result as follows

Quote:

$ sudo dnf -q history python3-libdnf
[sudo] password for XXXXX:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/dnf", line 57, in <module>
from dnf.cli import main
File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/__init__.py", line 30, in <module>
import dnf.base
File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/base.py", line 29, in <module>
import libdnf.transaction
File "/usr/lib64/python3.7/site-packages/libdnf/__init__.py", line 13, in <module>
from . import module
File "/usr/lib64/python3.7/site-packages/libdnf/module.py", line 13, in <module>
from . import _module
ImportError: /usr/lib64/python3.7/site-packages/libdnf/_module.so: undefined symbol: libdnf_error

so did not run the send command

shruggy · 05-04-2020, 10:29 AM

That's very unfortunate

. Ok, let's try this:

Code:

rpm -qa '*dnf*'|sort

This should output all installed packages that contain dnf in their names. Let's start with libdnf and python3-libdnf. Locate the latest versions of them you have installed either in /var/cache/dnf or in /var/cache/PackageKit

Code:

sudo find /var/cache/{dnf,PackageKit} -name '*libdnf-*.rpm'

Or, if they are not there, download the RPM packages from a Fedora repo (hopefully, the versions I linked to from the package names above are the right ones).

Now, try to reinstall them with rpm:

Code:

sudo rpm --reinstall /path/to/{python3-,}libdnf-0.47.0-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm

adjusting the red parts as needed.

GRS63 · 05-05-2020, 12:32 AM

look as if some where along the way some thing has tried to upgrade perhaps and not completed nd as a result there seems to be two version of a number of files.
he output of the first command is as follows;

Quote:

$ rpm -qa '*dnf*' | sort
dnf-4.2.18-1.fc31.noarch
dnf-4.2.21-1.fc31.noarch
dnfdaemon-0.3.19-7.fc31.noarch
dnfdaemon-selinux-0.3.19-7.fc31.noarch
dnf-data-4.2.18-1.fc31.noarch
dnf-data-4.2.21-1.fc31.noarch
dnfdragora-1.1.1-3.fc31.no arch
dnf-plugins-core-4.0.13-1.fc31.noarch
libdnf-0.43.1-5.fc31.x86_64
libdnf-0.47.0-1.fc31.x86_64
python3-dnf-4.2.18-1.fc31.noarch
python3-dnf-4.2.21-1.fc31.noarch
python3-dnfdaemon-0.3.19-7.fc31.noarch
python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.13-1.fc31.noarch
python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.15-1.fc31.noarch
python3-dnf-plugins-extras-common-4.0.8-4.fc31.noarch
python3-dnf-plugin-system-upgrade-4.0.8-4.fc31.noarch
python3-libdnf-0.43.1-5.fc31.x86_64
python3-libdnf-0.47.0-1.fc31.x86_64

It looks to me as if it is a bit more than the two files libdnf and pyton3-libdnf so I have not gone any further with per suggestion at this time. I am wondering if I need to delete both dnf and python3 and re install but I am not sure what else it may effect.

shruggy · 05-05-2020, 02:53 AM

Yes, you're right. And I bet python3-hawkey is affected, too. Here's the list of packages we'll be reinstalling:

Create an empty directory, download them all into it, change to that directory, and run:

Code:

sudo rpm -F --force *.rpm

GRS63 · 05-05-2020, 04:06 AM

Thanks DOwnloaded the files indicated into a director. Ran the command and got

Quote:

sudo rpm -F --force *.rpm
[sudo] password for XXXXX:
error: Failed dependencies:
dnf = 4.2.18-1.fc31 is needed by (installed) yum-4.2.18-1.fc31.noarch

looks as if I need to install the DNF file as well. Jut want to check before I do.

Looking at the pkgs for Fedora it would appear, I could find, that there is no file dnf-4.2.18-1.fc31. The files for Fedora 31 go dnf-4.2.9.. to dnf-4.2.21.... There is a file dnf-4.2.18-1.fc30 in the fedora 30 file list. So perhaps the issue goes back to when the system was upgraded from FC30 to FC31.

shruggy · 05-05-2020, 04:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GRS63

looks as if I need to install he DNF file as well.

DNF is already in the list. But yum wasn't. That's yet another package to be updated.

To expand on this. You misunderstood the error message. It actually means: dnf-4.2.18 cannot be replaced by a newer dnf-4.2.21 because an already installed package (yum-4.2.18) requires the old dnf. So, instead of keeping dnf at 4.2.18 we'll update yum to 4.2.21 then.

GRS63 · 05-06-2020, 03:58 AM

Thanks for the explanation. I wish I was more knowledgeable on these things.
I added Yum to the list of files and ran the rpm command. The results were as follows;

Quote:

sudo rpm -F --force *.rpm
[sudo] password for XXXXX:
/sbin/ldconfig: File /lib64/libliveMedia.so.79 is empty, not checked.
/sbin/ldconfig: File /lib64/libgroupsock.so.8 is empty, not checked.
/sbin/ldconfig: File /lib64/libliveMedia.so.79.0.0 is empty, not checked.
/sbin/ldconfig: File /lib64/libgroupsock.so.8.2.4 is empty, not checked.
/sbin/ldconfig: File /lib64/libliveMedia.so.79 is empty, not checked.
/sbin/ldconfig: File /lib64/libliveMedia.so.79.0.0 is empty, not checked.
/sbin/ldconfig: File /lib64/libgroupsock.so.8.2.4 is empty, not checked.

Not sure what teh empty file mean but I then ran sudo dnf upgrade refresh and receive the following;

Quote:

$ sudo dnf upgrade --refresh
AnyDesk Fedora - stable 400 B/s | 488 B 00:01
Copr repo for fedy owned by kwizart 4.5 kB/s | 3.3 kB 00:00
Fedora 31 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64 254 B/s | 543 B 00:02
Fedora Modular 31 - x86_64 4.0 kB/s | 3.6 kB 00:00
Fedora Modular 31 - x86_64 - Updates 12 kB/s | 4.1 kB 00:00
Fedora Modular 31 - x86_64 - Updates 352 kB/s | 199 kB 00:00
Fedora 31 - x86_64 - Updates 14 kB/s | 4.7 kB 00:00
Fedora 31 - x86_64 - Updates 622 kB/s | 479 kB 00:00
Fedora 31 - x86_64 11 kB/s | 3.6 kB 00:00
Ring 31 - x86_64 - ring 3.1 kB/s | 2.9 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 31 - Free - Updates 12 kB/s | 15 kB 00:01
RPM Fusion for Fedora 31 - Free 12 kB/s | 15 kB 00:01
RPM Fusion for Fedora 31 - Nonfree - Updates 15 kB/s | 14 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 31 - Nonfree 12 kB/s | 15 kB 00:01
Fedora 31 - x86_64 - VirtualBox 2.0 kB/s | 181 B 00:00
Webmin Distribution Neutral 1.5 kB/s | 2.9 kB 00:01
Error:
Problem 1: package kernel-modules-extra-5.5.15-200.fc31.x86_64 requires kernel-uname-r = 5.5.15-200.fc31.x86_64, but none of the providers can be installed
- conflicting requests
Problem 2: package kernel-5.5.15-200.fc31.x86_64 requires kernel-core-uname-r = 5.5.15-200.fc31.x86_64, but none of the providers can be installed
- conflicting requests
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)

It would seem there are still a number of issues I have to get resolved before I can do an update. Perhaps when I actually start the update or when it goes to install the updates other issues will show.

shruggy · 05-06-2020, 04:28 AM

Well, at least you can try skipping the uninstallable packages as suggested in the message. Fortunately, it's not an issue with dnf itself anymore. That means other dnf commands should also work now, so you can e.g. inspect the dnf transaction history with dnf -q history to see what and when went wrong. I'd also run dnf -q check to see if anything is wrong with your local package database.

GRS63 · 05-06-2020, 05:22 AM

Thanks. I really have apprecated you assistance. Yes DNF now works. I looked at the dnf history but there is nothing in there that hints of any issues So I had a look at dnf -q check this found 16 duplicates

Quote:

sudo rpm -q check
[sudo] password for XXXX
alsa-lib-1.2.2-1.fc31.x86_64 is a duplicate with alsa-lib-1.2.2-2.fc31.x86_64
fedora-gpg-keys-31-2.noarch is a duplicate with fedora-gpg-keys-31-3.noarch
git-2.25.2-1.fc31.x86_64 is a duplicate with git-2.25.3-1.fc31.x86_64
git-core-2.25.2-1.fc31.x86_64 is a duplicate with git-core-2.25.3-1.fc31.x86_64
git-core-doc-2.25.2-1.fc31.noarch is a duplicate with git-core-doc-2.25.3-1.fc31.noarch
jami-daemon-20200414.3.3f249d5-1.fc31.x86_64 is a duplicate with jami-daemon-20200417.3.fabd7b7-1.fc31.x86_64
kernel-tools-libs-5.5.16-200.fc31.x86_64 is a duplicate with kernel-tools-libs-5.5.17-200.fc31.x86_64
libcomps-0.1.14-1.fc31.x86_64 is a duplicate with libcomps-0.1.15-1.fc31.x86_64
libdca-0.0.6-5.fc31.x86_64 is a duplicate with libdca-0.0.7-1.fc31.x86_64
librepo-1.11.1-1.fc31.x86_64 is a duplicate with librepo-1.11.3-1.fc31.x86_64
libssh-config-0.9.3-1.fc31.noarch is a duplicate with libssh-config-0.9.4-2.fc31.noarch
libva-2.6.0-0.1.fc31.x86_64 is a duplicate with libva-2.6.1-1.fc31.x86_64
live555-2019.07.27-2.fc31.x86_64 is a duplicate with live555-2020.04.12-1.fc31.x86_64
perl-Git-2.25.2-1.fc31.noarch is a duplicate with perl-Git-2.25.3-1.fc31.noarch
python3-libcomps-0.1.14-1.fc31.x86_64 is a duplicate with python3-libcomps-0.1.15-1.fc31.x86_64
vlc-core-1:3.0.9-33.fc31.x86_64 is a duplicate with vlc-core-1:3.0.9.2-2.fc31.x86_64
Error: Check discovered 16 problem(s)