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 "dnf --refresh upgrade" > > > shows the same packets to be updated, and *some more*. > > > > So two update commands at different times give different results? > > IIUC, you are misunderstanding. > > The issues behind this are > - "dnf --refetch" is refetching different versions of metadata from > different (and differently sync'ed and/or broken) mirrors > - fedora's mirrorlists are pointing to mirrors being out of sync. What matters is whether dnf is seeing the same state the two times it runs. In this case it clearly isn't. That can be due to delayed syncing or simply to updates appearing between one run and the next. > In addition to that, https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org seems to have > been down and inaccessible for several hours, last weekend, which > caused additional issues with dnf (and yum). Same result. If dnf is run twice you can't guarantee it will give the same result. That's an inherent feature of loosely distributed systems (where there isn't a distributed consensus protocol). Obviously the wider apart the two runs, the more differences will tend to appear, but the presence of differences does not in itself indicate a problem. poc -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
