{"id":2106,"date":"2017-11-15T16:27:56","date_gmt":"2017-11-16T00:27:56","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rglinuxtech.com\/?p=2106"},"modified":"2017-11-25T09:46:18","modified_gmt":"2017-11-25T17:46:18","slug":"fedora-26-27-dnf-upgrade-woes-and-a-workaround","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/rglinuxtech.com\/?p=2106","title":{"rendered":"Fedora &#8211; 26-27 DNF Upgrade Woes, and a Workaround.."},"content":{"rendered":"<p>After <em>upgrading<\/em> four Fedora systems (x86_64) from release 26 to 27, using <span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong><code># dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=27 --allowerasing --nogpgcheck --best -y<\/code><\/strong><\/span>, two of these worked OK, but two failed &#8211; with a sudden reboot, back to F26 &#8211; and no (apparent) error displayed, after <span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong><code># dnf system-upgrade reboot<\/code><\/strong><\/span> had rebooted the system, and the upgrade process had started, but before the actual rpms were processed:<\/p>\n<pre><span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong>.........................<\/strong><\/span>\r\n<span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong>dnf[914]: 7f83cc874000-7f83cca73000 ---p 00030000 08:03 7865985 \/usr\/lib64\/libexpat.so.1.6.6<\/strong><\/span>\r\n<span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong>dnf[914]: 7f83cca73000-7f83cca76000 r--p 0002f000 08:03 7865985 \/usr\/lib64\/libexpat.so.1.6.6<\/strong><\/span>\r\n<span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong>dnf[914]: 7f83cca76000-7f83cca77000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0<\/strong><\/span>\r\n<span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong>dnf[914]: 7f83cca77000-7f83cca9c000 r-xp 00000000 08:03 7896214 \/usr\/lib64\/librepo.so.0<\/strong><\/span>\r\n<span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong>dnf[914]: 7f83cca9c000-7f83ccc9c000 ---p 00025000 08:03 7896214 \/usr\/lib64\/librepo.so.0<\/strong><\/span>\r\n<span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong>dnf[914]: 7f83ccc9c000-7f83ccc9d000 r--p 00025000 08:03 7896214 \/usr\/lib64\/librepo.so.0<\/strong><\/span>\r\n<span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong>dnf[914]: 7f83ccc9d000-7f83ccc9e000 rw-p 00026000 08:03 7896214 \/usr\/lib64\/librepo.so.0<\/strong><\/span>\r\n<span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong>dnf[914]: 7f83cccb8000-7f83cccf8000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0<\/strong><\/span>\r\n<span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong>dnf[91reboot: Restarting system<\/strong><\/span>\r\n<span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong>..............\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>(system reboots, into F26 again..<\/span><\/pre>\n<p>I had encountered a similar problem before, and was able to work out a &#8211; rather convoluted &#8211; workaround..<\/p>\n<p>In this upgrade, the F27 rpms are resident at <span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong>\/var\/lib\/dnf\/system-upgrade<\/strong><\/span> , and each repo has its own sub-directory &#8211; the repo ID followed by a uuid-style numerical string, eg:\u00a0 <strong><span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\">fedora-cba4cf65782eccda<\/span><\/strong> , <strong><span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\">updates-09879b494aeba108<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><span style=\"font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"> ,<\/span> <strong>rpmfusion-free-093775106f01a54b <\/strong><\/span><span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><span style=\"font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\">etc..\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 In each of these, the F27 upgrade rpms &#8211; if there are any &#8211; are in the <span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong>packages<\/strong><\/span> sub-directory..\u00a0 If there are no upgrade rpms for a particular repo, then the <strong><span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\">packages<\/span><\/strong> sub-directory will not exist..<br \/>\n<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p>As root, I created a temporary directory and copied each group of F27 rpms to this, so that the update\/upgrade could be done all-at-once..\u00a0 Then I checked for the kernel&#8230;.xxx rpms, and <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">installed<\/span> (not updated!) these by <span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><strong><code># rpm -ivh kernel*rpm --nodeps --force<\/code><\/strong><\/span> , and then <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">deleted<\/span> them..\u00a0\u00a0 After that, I <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">updated<\/span> all the remaining F27 rpms:\u00a0 <strong><span style=\"font-family: courier new,courier;\"><code># rpm -Uvh *rpm --nodeps --force<\/code><\/span><\/strong> , and waited for this to complete (which takes some time!).\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 After that, I simply re-booted the system, and it came back up &#8211; correctly &#8211; as Fedora 27.<\/p>\n<p><em>Robert Gadsdon.\u00a0\u00a0 November 15, 2017.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 (updated Nov 25, to clearly show double-dash in rpm commands, which normally get merged in &#8216;publishing&#8217;, and have to be handled in raw html!<\/em><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>After upgrading four Fedora systems (x86_64) from release 26 to 27, using # dnf system-upgrade download &#8211;refresh &#8211;releasever=27 &#8211;allowerasing &#8211;nogpgcheck &#8211;best -y, two of these worked OK, but two failed &#8211; with a sudden reboot, back to F26 &#8211; and no (apparent) error displayed, after # dnf system-upgrade reboot had rebooted the system, and the upgrade process <span class=\"excerpt-dots\">&hellip;<\/span> <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/rglinuxtech.com\/?p=2106\"><span class=\"more-msg\">Continue reading &rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1280,10,1238,11,15,19,1535,350],"tags":[1742,1743,148,154,161,1744,418],"class_list":["post-2106","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-boot","category-fedora","category-fix","category-hacks","category-linux-2","category-opinion","category-quirks","category-success","tag-27-upgrade","tag-dnf-system-upgrade","tag-fail","tag-fedora-2","tag-fix","tag-reboot","tag-workaround"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/rglinuxtech.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2106","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/rglinuxtech.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/rglinuxtech.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rglinuxtech.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rglinuxtech.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2106"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/rglinuxtech.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2106\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2123,"href":"https:\/\/rglinuxtech.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2106\/revisions\/2123"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/rglinuxtech.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2106"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rglinuxtech.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2106"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rglinuxtech.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2106"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}