On Thu, 2019-10-24 at 11:07 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 10/24/19 10:53 AM, Felix Miata wrote: > > Samuel Sieb composed on 2019-10-24 08:15 (UTC-0700): > > > > > Felix Miata wrote: > > > > This has been rather routine here in recent weeks trying to system-upgrade to f31 > > > > from a freshly upgraded f30. This is with/without allowerasing and/or best and/or > > > > skip-broken options. Does it happen to others? Is there a known workaround? Is > > > > there a way to get dnf to report what's trying to cause kernel and/or systemd > > > > removal? The only workaround I've found is to not exclude kernel*, which used to > > > > be an easy way to gain some freespace back from filling / with 100% of rpms > > > > downloaded in advance. With a fresh new kernel, there's no rush to have a nearly > > > > identical kernel available right away. On my systems, it won't get used on first > > > > post-upgrade boot anyway (booting the symlink to the most recent kernel, which the > > > > upgrade doesn't touch). > > > > > You need to include the command you're running and the output from dnf > > > for this to be useful. > > > > $SUBJECT is the output. > > No, it's not. dnf prints out a lot more than that and to find out > what's happening, we need to see it. I mean, excluding the kernel from the transaction is already kinda out of bounds. Just don't do that. :P -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ test mailing list -- test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to test-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/test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
