Was just doing a (very) belated update on a 7.5 system and ran into this set of errors:
================================================================================ Package Arch Version Repository Size ================================================================================ Updating: polkit x86_64 0.112-18.el7_6.1 updates 168 k polkit-devel x86_64 0.112-18.el7_6.1 updates 42 k polkit-docs noarch 0.112-18.el7_6.1 updates 251 k
Transaction Summary ================================================================================ Upgrade 3 Packages
Total download size: 461 k Is this ok [y/d/N]: y Downloading packages: Finishing delta rebuilds of 3 package(s) (461 k) Some delta RPMs failed to download or rebuild. Retrying.. polkit-0.112-18.el7_6.1.x86_64 FAILED http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/updates/x86_64/Packages/polkit-0.112-18.el...: [Errno 14] HTTP Error 416 - Requested Range Not Satisfiable Trying other mirror. polkit-devel-0.112-18.el7_6.1. FAILED http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/updates/x86_64/Packages/polkit-devel-0.112...: [Errno 14] HTTP Error 416 - Requested Range Not Satisfiable Trying other mirror. polkit-docs-0.112-18.el7_6.1.n FAILED http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/updates/x86_64/Packages/polkit-docs-0.112-...: [Errno 14] HTTP Error 416 - Requested Range Not Satisfiable Trying other mirror.
Error downloading packages: polkit-0.112-18.el7_6.1.x86_64: [Errno 256] No more mirrors to try. polkit-devel-0.112-18.el7_6.1.x86_64: [Errno 256] No more mirrors to try. polkit-docs-0.112-18.el7_6.1.noarch: [Errno 256] No more mirrors to try.
I then browsed to the mirror shown above and downloaded the files with no trouble. I then did "yum localupdate" for the three downloaded files and they installed just fine.
so, anybody know why we're getting the 416 error from yum but not from firefox?
a little searching for that error indicates it is some kind of problem on the web host, I think. but it's weird.
I don't need help, I'm good, but perhaps someone needs to look at whatever mis-configuration on the host(s) causes that.
I originally left the repo file alone so it attempted to use the repolist but every repo failed. I then changed it to use the baseurl but it didn't help. So whatever the problem is, it isn't with just a single host.
Fred
On Mar 22, 2019, at 9:52 PM, Fred Smith fredex@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us wrote:
Was just doing a (very) belated update on a 7.5 system and ran into this set of errors:
Some delta RPMs failed to download or rebuild. Retrying..
so, anybody know why we're getting the 416 error from yum but not from firefox?
Hi Fred,
Ran into this yesterday. It seems to be a delta rpm problem. Firefox is working because it’s downloading the whole rpm, avoiding the issue.
setting deltarpm=0 in /etc/yum.conf is an equivalent workaround, and fixed the issue for me.
I’d appreciate someone who knows more about how delta rpms work weighing in on what the actual issue is.
Bez Thomas Tech Services, Astronomy/CCAPS Cornell University
On 3/23/19 9:19 AM, Bez Thomas wrote:
On Mar 22, 2019, at 9:52 PM, Fred Smith fredex@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us wrote:
Was just doing a (very) belated update on a 7.5 system and ran into this set of errors:
Some delta RPMs failed to download or rebuild. Retrying..
so, anybody know why we're getting the 416 error from yum but not from firefox?
Hi Fred,
Ran into this yesterday. It seems to be a delta rpm problem. Firefox is working because it’s downloading the whole rpm, avoiding the issue.
setting deltarpm=0 in /etc/yum.conf is an equivalent workaround, and fixed the issue for me.
I’d appreciate someone who knows more about how delta rpms work weighing in on what the actual issue is.
Not sure what happened with the drpms, but I will regenerate all the polkit drpms with the upcoming ghostscript release later this morning.
I added drpm tests to our pre-release CI tests as well.
On 3/25/19 6:37 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 3/23/19 9:19 AM, Bez Thomas wrote:
On Mar 22, 2019, at 9:52 PM, Fred Smith fredex@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us wrote:
Was just doing a (very) belated update on a 7.5 system and ran into this set of errors:
Some delta RPMs failed to download or rebuild. Retrying..
so, anybody know why we're getting the 416 error from yum but not from firefox?
Hi Fred,
Ran into this yesterday. It seems to be a delta rpm problem. Firefox is working because it’s downloading the whole rpm, avoiding the issue.
setting deltarpm=0 in /etc/yum.conf is an equivalent workaround, and fixed the issue for me.
I’d appreciate someone who knows more about how delta rpms work weighing in on what the actual issue is.
Not sure what happened with the drpms, but I will regenerate all the polkit drpms with the upcoming ghostscript release later this morning.
I added drpm tests to our pre-release CI tests as well.
This is not the first time we have had issues with drpms in the update tree.
Would anyone be opposed to taking away deltarpms from the repositories?
They take up lots of space and they have cause multiple issues in the past.
Thoughts?
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 07:32:33AM -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
This is not the first time we have had issues with drpms in the update tree.
Would anyone be opposed to taking away deltarpms from the repositories?
They take up lots of space and they have cause multiple issues in the past.
Thoughts?
A big +1 to punting.
John
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 07:32:33AM -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 3/25/19 6:37 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 3/23/19 9:19 AM, Bez Thomas wrote:
On Mar 22, 2019, at 9:52 PM, Fred Smith fredex@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us wrote:
Was just doing a (very) belated update on a 7.5 system and ran into this set of errors:
Some delta RPMs failed to download or rebuild. Retrying..
so, anybody know why we're getting the 416 error from yum but not from firefox?
Hi Fred,
Ran into this yesterday. It seems to be a delta rpm problem. Firefox is working because it’s downloading the whole rpm, avoiding the issue.
setting deltarpm=0 in /etc/yum.conf is an equivalent workaround, and fixed the issue for me.
I’d appreciate someone who knows more about how delta rpms work weighing in on what the actual issue is.
Not sure what happened with the drpms, but I will regenerate all the polkit drpms with the upcoming ghostscript release later this morning.
I added drpm tests to our pre-release CI tests as well.
This is not the first time we have had issues with drpms in the update tree.
Would anyone be opposed to taking away deltarpms from the repositories?
They take up lots of space and they have cause multiple issues in the past.
Thoughts?
Johnny, thanks for looking into this.
I, for one, have no issue with there being no drpms. their purpose was, as I recall, to save bandwidth. this may still help for busy mirrors, but for most of us bandwidth is no problem. Someone on dialup may disagree, but how many of those are there these days?
Fred
Nothing against removing drpms. Nuke them.
-- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux! www.nux.ro
----- Original Message -----
From: "johnny" johnny@centos.org To: "CentOS mailing list" centos@centos.org Sent: Monday, 25 March, 2019 12:32:33 Subject: Re: [CentOS] http error when updating 7.5 ==> 7.6
On 3/25/19 6:37 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 3/23/19 9:19 AM, Bez Thomas wrote:
On Mar 22, 2019, at 9:52 PM, Fred Smith fredex@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us wrote:
Was just doing a (very) belated update on a 7.5 system and ran into this set of errors:
Some delta RPMs failed to download or rebuild. Retrying..
so, anybody know why we're getting the 416 error from yum but not from firefox?
Hi Fred,
Ran into this yesterday. It seems to be a delta rpm problem. Firefox is working because it’s downloading the whole rpm, avoiding the issue.
setting deltarpm=0 in /etc/yum.conf is an equivalent workaround, and fixed the issue for me.
I’d appreciate someone who knows more about how delta rpms work weighing in on what the actual issue is.
Not sure what happened with the drpms, but I will regenerate all the polkit drpms with the upcoming ghostscript release later this morning.
I added drpm tests to our pre-release CI tests as well.
This is not the first time we have had issues with drpms in the update tree.
Would anyone be opposed to taking away deltarpms from the repositories?
They take up lots of space and they have cause multiple issues in the past.
Thoughts?
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 3/25/19 8:32 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
This is not the first time we have had issues with drpms in the update tree. Would anyone be opposed to taking away deltarpms from the repositories?
They take up lots of space and they have cause multiple issues in the past.
Thoughts?
Due to the disk churn deltarpms need and our own internal mirroring of centos packages, one of the first things I do post-install is disable deltarpms.
However, I'm sure there are users on limited connections (either monthly cap or slow) who appreciate the deltarpms who are not on this list to cast their vote.
I suppose the only way to find out is to take them away and if there is outcry, put them back.
On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 10:01:12AM -0400, Chris Schanzle via CentOS wrote:
On 3/25/19 8:32 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
This is not the first time we have had issues with drpms in the update tree. Would anyone be opposed to taking away deltarpms from the repositories?
They take up lots of space and they have cause multiple issues in the past.
Thoughts?
Due to the disk churn deltarpms need and our own internal mirroring of centos packages, one of the first things I do post-install is disable deltarpms.
However, I'm sure there are users on limited connections (either monthly cap or slow) who appreciate the deltarpms who are not on this list to cast their vote.
I suppose the only way to find out is to take them away and if there is outcry, put them back.
Works for me.
-
Bez Thomas -
Chris Schanzle -
Fred Smith -
John R. Dennison -
Johnny Hughes -
Nux!