Generally, the repo seems to work fine. But I would add the line metadata_expire=6h because this repo seems to be also intended to provide potential (security) updates for the package you want to install. Especially security updates should be installed asap. Formally, type=rpm might be added as well to make everything explicit but this is unlikely to cause an issue (dnf should enforce this indirectly anyway).
The reason for the error is not the repo but the package: the package you want to install needs another package: libgtkglext-x11-1_0-0 → this is not contained in any repo.
However, you maybe try a refresh (the data you provided doesn’t show the state of the database) before we elaborate more sophisticated troubleshooting: dnf install anydesk --refresh → please provide the whole output of this command, just to see what repos are currently involved.
Be aware that this repository is maintained by anydesk (not the Fedora community!) and therefore, this repository has not undergone the testing and quality assurance of the Fedora community!
I’ve been seeing this for a while, and I’ve also reported it to Anydesk but have not seen any action about it. The last version that works (and is still working for me) is:
$ rpm -q anydesk
anydesk-6.1.1-1.x86_64
Their official stance seems to be that “Fedora is not supported”:
Thanks for clarification, I knew there was some kind of dependency but wasn’t sure if it was the repo having trouble adding it or the dependency not installing.
I am running the flatpak version with no trouble and it talks Fedora to mac and fedora to windows very very well and vica versa,
The anydesk guys have not updated the flatpak version and its outdated and that’s why I am trying to install the Fedora version.
The error is at the bottom precisely as you described, shouldn’t we be able to try the Redhat version or centos version as they run the yum package also?
Ah I see thanks for pointing that out, i thought there were “official” and “unofficial” flatpaks like unofficial fedora packages like the copr repo.
The topic has been already solved in post 11. If topics are inactive for such a long time, you should expect by default that the problem has been sufficiently addressed.