![]() In other words, there should be no conflict, according to this output. Which is the package that was originally listed as the package I want to update, yet as already pointed out above, this depends on libconfuse.so.1()(64bit) provided by 86_64. Digging into dnf repoquery a bit, I found that dnf repoquery -all -installed -whatrequires libconfuse should give me the desired output. In other words, the only package that requires this is the package itself, but this doesn't happen all the time, so I'm guessing this list is somehow incomplete. I assumed reverse dependencies of installed packages would be easy to search, but the solution suggested here states that dnf repoquery -available -alldeps -source -whatrequires libconfuse-3.2.86_64 should do the trick however the output is: Last metadata expiration check: 1:59:58 ago on Tue 03:16:34 PM CET.Īnd of that rpm, there are no dependencies at all. However, I cannot for the life of me figure out what thing depends on the older libconfuse-3.2.86_64 package. sudo dnf list installed libgusb -showduplicates sudo dnf list available libgusb -showduplicates You may try sudo dnf distro-sync Looks like a version conflict. I figured out (with dnf -deplist info) that 86_64 depends on 86_64: dependency: libconfuse.so.1()(64bit) cannot install the best update candidate for package 86_64 cannot install both 86_64 and libconfuse-3.2.86_64 To summarize: - you had both nss.i686 and nss.x8664 installed - newer updates for both were available - dnf update attempted to update nss.i686, only, but that doesnt work, because the conflicts with duplicate files only are avoided if both architectures get updated at the same time. ![]() cannot install both libconfuse-3.2.86_64 and 86_64 package 86_64 requires libconfuse.so.1()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed Problem: problem with installed package 86_64 Last metadata expiration check: 1:49:45 ago on Tue 03:16:34 PM CET. The following is the conflict: $dnf update ![]() The TL DR of this question is: how do I get dnf to tell me which packages are conflicting and what the associated dependents are? This related question says that I should use -best to solve the problem, but this still doesn't tell me why a seemingly non-conflicting situation is considered a conflict. However, I cannot figure out how to get dnf to tell me the cause of the conflict. I paste here the first five lines file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/IPython/_init_.py from install of python2-ipython-5.5. conflicts with file from package python-ipython-console-3.2.įile /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/IPython/core/magics/_init_.py from install of python2-ipython-5.5. conflicts with file from package python-ipython-console-3.2.įile /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/IPython/kernel/_init_.py from install of python2-ipython-5.5. conflicts with file from package python-ipython-console-3.2.įile /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/IPython/_init_.pyc from install of python2-ipython-5.5. conflicts with file from package python-ipython-console-3.2.įile /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/IPython/core/_init_.pyc from install of python2-ipython-5.5. conflicts with file from package python-ipython-console-3.2. recently tried to update some packages on my (fedora 27, 圆4) machine, which dnf complains is in conflict. I encountered a transaction check error regarding python. When running sudo dnf system-upgrade download -releasever=27 -allowerasing I tried to upgrade from fedora 25 to fedora 27.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |