Re: tip: when dnf thinks you are on the wrong release

[Stephen Morris <steve.morris.au@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 11/11/24 09:10, home user via users wrote:

> On
>       11/10/24 10:30 AM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
>       
> > Hi All,
> >         
> >         
> >         [snip]
> >         
> >       
>       
>       On my stand-alone home workstation, that is a link to a link to
>       /usr/lib/fedora-release:
>       
>       
>       -bash.1[~]: ls -l /etc/redhat-release
>       
>       lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 14 Apr 11  2024 /etc/redhat-release ->
>       fedora-release
>       
>       -bash.2[~]: ls /etc/fed*
>       
>       /etc/fedora-release
>       
>       -bash.3[~]: ls -l /etc/fed*
>       
>       lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 25 Apr 11  2024 /etc/fedora-release ->
>       ../usr/lib/fedora-release
>       
>       -bash.4[~]: ls -l /usr/lib/fedora-release
>       
>       -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 26 Apr 11  2024 /usr/lib/fedora-release
>       
>       -bash.5[~]: cat /usr/lib/fedora-release
>       
>       Fedora release 40 (Forty)
>       
>       
> >   It uses
> >         
> >             /usr/share/licenses/fedora/fedora-release-common*
> >         
> >       
>       
>       On my stand-alone home workstation, there's no such thing:
>       
>       
>       -bash.6[~]: ls -l
>       /usr/share/licenses/fedora/fedora-release-common*
>       
>       ls: cannot access
>       '/usr/share/licenses/fedora/fedora-release-common*': No such file
>       or directory
>       
>       -bash.7[~]:
>       
>       
>       There's not even a /usr/share/licenses/fedora directory:
>       
>       
>       -bash.7[~]: ls -l /usr/share/licenses/fed*
>       
>       /usr/share/licenses/fedora-logos:
>       
>       total 4
>       
>       -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1878 Feb 20  2023 COPYING
>       
>       
>       /usr/share/licenses/fedora-logos-classic:
>       
>       total 4
>       
>       -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1878 Feb 20  2023 COPYING
>       
>       
>       /usr/share/licenses/fedora-release-common:
>       
>       total 8
>       
>       -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1295 Apr 11  2024 Fedora-Legal-README.txt
>       
>       -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1063 Apr 11  2024 LICENSE
>       
>       -bash.8[~]:
>       
>       
>     
    Yes, based on my F41 upgraded machine that has yet to have any of
    the post-install processes run, that is what I would expect and I
    would expect rpm -qa /*fedora-release-common/* to produce nothing?
    If this is what your stand-alone machine is producing then I would
    expect it to be fine?
    
    regards,
    Steve

Attachment: OpenPGP_0x1EBE7C07B0F7242C.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

-- 
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue