Arch Linux

jasonwryan

Anarchist

From: .nz

Registered: 2009-05-09

Posts: 30,424

Website

Re: [SOLVED] New pacman update giving me issues

So...  reading the pacman output and merging .pacnew files and everything was fine...   Who would have ever guessed.

What might come to you as common sense being a developer might make sense.

I find this reply very rude. I do thank those who have helped but I don't really need you pointing out my "duh" moment.

I am human and I bleed red and sometimes I may have such issues. Judging by these posts about issues I guess many have not "guessed".

It's not common sense: it's just reading the ample documentation.

It's also the Arch Way:

User-centric

Whereas many GNU/Linux distributions attempt to be more user-friendly, Arch Linux has always been, and will always remain user-centric.

Arch Linux targets and accommodates competent GNU/Linux users by giving them complete control and responsibility over the system.

Arch Linux users fully manage the system on their own. The system itself will offer little assistance, except for a simple set of maintenance tools that are designed to perfectly relay the user's commands to the system. Arch developers do not expend energy re-inventing GUI system tools; Arch is founded upon sensible design and excellent documentation.

This user-centric design necessarily implies a certain "do-it-yourself" approach to using the Arch distribution. Rather than pursuing assistance or requesting a new feature to be implemented by developers, Arch Linux users have a tendency to solve problems themselves and share the results with the community and development team – a "do first, then ask" philosophy. This is especially true for user-contributed packages found in the Arch User Repository – the official Arch Linux repository for community-maintained packages.

---

Arch + dwm   •   Mercurial repos  •   Surfraw

Registered Linux User #482438

corbintechboy

Member

Registered: 2010-04-25

Posts: 11

Re: [SOLVED] New pacman update giving me issues

So...  reading the pacman output and merging .pacnew files and everything was fine...   Who would have ever guessed.

What might come to you as common sense being a developer might make sense.

I find this reply very rude. I do thank those who have helped but I don't really need you pointing out my "duh" moment.

I am human and I bleed red and sometimes I may have such issues. Judging by these posts about issues I guess many have not "guessed".

Considering that:
* the news article clearly states that .pacnew and .pacsave should be merged
* several wiki articles on this were updated before pacman 4.x was introduced to the user
* pacman itself drops information to the terminal when things require user actions (the fact that you ran into these messages means pacman said that .pacnew / .pacsave files were installed, you wouldn't have seen these messages otherwise)
* several topics on this exist already
* the archlinux IRC channel's topic tells you to merge pacnew / pacsave files
* the arch mailing list saw an e-mail noting all of this

I appreciate that this feels like a kick in the arse after the fact, but Arch is advertised as a "read the wiki" distro, some level of slapping when reading isn't done is to be expected.

You really do have to properly read things on this distro, that's all that is being pointed out here.

I do read and have set up computers on many occasions without having to interact. When I did the update there was no news on the front page. I have 10 posts and joined in 2010. I don't feel I am expecting anyone to hold my hand.

On a lighter note, I thank you all for the replies.

beachcoder

Member

Registered: 2009-10-08

Posts: 130

Re: [SOLVED] New pacman update giving me issues

Hi folks,

I suggest to move your old /etc/pacman.conf to a backup file, then move /etc/pacman.conf.pacnew to /etc/pacman.conf and add your (possibly) additional repositories.
Then, uncomment

SigLevel Optional TrustAll

and comment

# SigLevel Never

this worked very well for me.

You have to do this on top of pacman.conf, not in the repostory sections.

Enjoy.

Ranmaru

Member

From: Japan

Registered: 2011-11-20

Posts: 60

Re: [SOLVED] New pacman update giving me issues

Try changing the keyserver in /etc/pacman.d/gnupg/gpg.conf

Thanks, but that doesn't seem to work. In fact, I get a different error now, so at least the import issue seems to be solved.

error: colord: key "E8F18BA1615137BC" is unknown
error: key "E8F18BA1615137BC" could not be looked up remotely
error: inetutils: key "FCF2CB179205AC90" is unknown
error: key "FCF2CB179205AC90" could not be looked up remotely
error: failed to commit transaction (invalid or corrupted package)
Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.

Is this a server error? I can't seem connect to pgp.mit.edu at all ...

wintermute alex /etc % sudo pacman-key --refresh-keys
gpg: refreshing 6 keys from hkp://pgp.mit.edu:11371
gpg: requesting key FFF979E7 from hkp server pgp.mit.edu
gpg: requesting key 4C7EA887 from hkp server pgp.mit.edu
gpg: requesting key 6AC6A4C2 from hkp server pgp.mit.edu
gpg: requesting key CDFD6BB0 from hkp server pgp.mit.edu
gpg: requesting key F56C0C53 from hkp server pgp.mit.edu
gpg: requesting key 4FA415FA from hkp server pgp.mit.edu
gpgkeys: key AB19265E5D7D20687D303246BA1DFB64FFF979E7 not found on keyserver
gpgkeys: key 44D4A033AC140143927397D47EFD567D4C7EA887 not found on keyserver
gpgkeys: key 0E8B644079F599DFC1DDC3973348882F6AC6A4C2 not found on keyserver
gpgkeys: key 27FFC4769E19F096D41D9265A04F9397CDFD6BB0 not found on keyserver
gpgkeys: key 487EACC08557AD082088DABA1EB2638FF56C0C53 not found on keyserver
gpgkeys: key 8218F88849AAC522E94CF470A5E9288C4FA415FA not found on keyserver
gpg: no valid OpenPGP data found.
gpg: Total number processed: 0

But when I use keys.gnupg.net, the refresh works. Only pacman doesn't ...

wintermute alex /etc % sudo pacman-key --keyserver hkp://keys.gnupg.net --refresh-keys 
gpg: refreshing 6 keys from hkp://keys.gnupg.net
gpg: requesting key FFF979E7 from hkp server keys.gnupg.net
gpg: requesting key 4C7EA887 from hkp server keys.gnupg.net
gpg: requesting key 6AC6A4C2 from hkp server keys.gnupg.net
gpg: requesting key CDFD6BB0 from hkp server keys.gnupg.net
gpg: requesting key F56C0C53 from hkp server keys.gnupg.net
gpg: requesting key 4FA415FA from hkp server keys.gnupg.net
gpg: key FFF979E7: "Allan McRae (Arch Linux Master Key) <allan@master-key.archlinux.org>" not changed
gpg: key 4C7EA887: "Ionut Biru (Arch Linux Master Key) <ionut@master-key.archlinux.org>" not changed
gpg: key 6AC6A4C2: "Pierre Schmitz (Arch Linux Master Key) <pierre@master-key.archlinux.org>" not changed
gpg: key CDFD6BB0: "Dan McGee (Arch Linux Master Key) <dan@master-key.archlinux.org>" not changed
gpg: key F56C0C53: "Dave Reisner <d@falconindy.com>" not changed
gpg: key 4FA415FA: "Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) <jan.steffens@gmail.com>" not changed
gpg: Total number processed: 6
gpg:              unchanged: 6

dif

Member

From: Stalowa Wola, Poland

Registered: 2009-12-22

Posts: 137

Re: [SOLVED] New pacman update giving me issues

The last post does not look like a "SOLVED" issue.

My pacman wouldn't update to pacman-4.0.2-1-i686, informing about a damaged package or pgp signature, so I came here for help only to find out that I should expect slapping on my arse, and a super intellectual discussion about merging *pacnews.

My pacman informed:

error:  pacman: key "1EB2638FF56C0C53" is unknown
error:  key "1EB2638FF56C0C53" could not be looked up remotely
error:  it was not possible to make transaction (Incorrect or corrupt package (PGP signature)) # translation from Polish

I checked everything. It was OK. No "unmerged" pacnews. Pacman-key initialised and working for some time already.
I switched back and forth the keyserver.
Tried a few more times--no more config modifications-- and all of a sudden it worked.

So for me, the issue is solved (by itself really), but do not tell people they are stupid.

I love archlinux, but I hate I-know-it-all.-How-come-you-don't? attitude.
And don't tell me I'm bloating this forum. Have a look at the discussion above before you do.

Good luck to those who come here for answers.