Update issue with AMD-related MESA drivers from rpmfusion: mesa-va-drivers-freeworld, mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld (often introduced during attempts to enable hardware acceleration for video codecs)

Ask Fedora
, , , , ,
1

People with AMD hardware who have swapped the default mesa drivers (mesa-va-drivers, mesa-vdpau-drivers) to the rpmfusion drivers (mesa-va-drivers-freeworld, mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld) might experience an issue when doing updates at the moment: they experience that updates of related packages cannot be conducted due to a conflict.

In dnf, it might look like this:


 Problem 1: package mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-24.0.6-1.fc40.x86_64 from @System requires mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 24.0.6, but none of the providers can be installed
  - cannot install both mesa-filesystem-24.0.7-1.fc40.x86_64 from updates and mesa-filesystem-24.0.6-2.fc40.x86_64 from @System
  - cannot install the best update candidate for package mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-24.0.6-1.fc40.x86_64
  - cannot install the best update candidate for package mesa-filesystem-24.0.6-2.fc40.x86_64
 Problem 2: cannot install both mesa-filesystem-24.0.7-1.fc40.x86_64 from updates and mesa-filesystem-24.0.6-2.fc40.x86_64 from @System
  - package mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld-24.0.6-1.fc40.x86_64 from @System requires mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 24.0.6, but none of the providers can be installed
  - package mesa-dri-drivers-24.0.7-1.fc40.x86_64 from updates requires mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 24.0.7-1.fc40, but none of the providers can be installed
  - cannot install the best update candidate for package mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld-24.0.6-1.fc40.x86_64
  - cannot install the best update candidate for package mesa-dri-drivers-24.0.6-2.fc40.x86_64
 Problem 3: problem with installed package mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld-24.0.6-1.fc40.x86_64
  - package mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld-24.0.6-1.fc40.x86_64 from @System requires mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 24.0.6, but none of the providers can be installed
  - package mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld-24.0.6-1.fc40.x86_64 from rpmfusion-free-updates requires mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 24.0.6, but none of the providers can be installed
  - cannot install both mesa-filesystem-24.0.7-1.fc40.x86_64 from updates and mesa-filesystem-24.0.6-2.fc40.x86_64 from @System
  - package mesa-dri-drivers-24.0.7-1.fc40.x86_64 from updates requires mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 24.0.7-1.fc40, but none of the providers can be installed
  - problem with installed package mesa-dri-drivers-24.0.6-2.fc40.x86_64
  - package mesa-dri-drivers-24.0.6-2.fc40.x86_64 from @System requires mesa-libglapi(x86-64) = 24.0.6-2.fc40, but none of the providers can be installed
  - cannot install both mesa-libglapi-24.0.7-1.fc40.x86_64 from updates and mesa-libglapi-24.0.6-2.fc40.x86_64 from @System
  - cannot install the best update candidate for package mesa-libglapi-24.0.6-2.fc40.x86_64
 Problem 4: mesa-dri-drivers-24.0.7-1.fc40.i686 from updates  does not belong to a distupgrade repository
  - package qemu-ui-opengl-2:8.2.2-1.fc40.x86_64 from @System requires mesa-dri-drivers, but none of the providers can be installed
  - package mesa-dri-drivers-24.0.7-1.fc40.x86_64 from updates requires mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 24.0.7-1.fc40, but none of the providers can be installed
  - cannot install both mesa-filesystem-24.0.7-1.fc40.x86_64 from updates and mesa-filesystem-24.0.6-2.fc40.x86_64 from @System
  - problem with installed package mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-24.0.6-1.fc40.x86_64
  - package mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-24.0.6-1.fc40.x86_64 from @System requires mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 24.0.6, but none of the providers can be installed
  - package mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-24.0.6-1.fc40.x86_64 from rpmfusion-free-updates requires mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 24.0.6, but none of the providers can be installed
  - mesa-dri-drivers-24.0.5-1.fc40.i686 from fedora  does not belong to a distupgrade repository
  - package mesa-dri-drivers-24.0.6-2.fc40.x86_64 from @System requires mesa-libglapi(x86-64) = 24.0.6-2.fc40, but none of the providers can be installed
  - package mesa-dri-drivers-24.0.5-1.fc40.x86_64 from fedora requires mesa-libglapi(x86-64) = 24.0.5-1.fc40, but none of the providers can be installed
  - cannot install both mesa-libglapi-24.0.7-1.fc40.x86_64 from updates and mesa-libglapi-24.0.6-2.fc40.x86_64 from @System
  - cannot install both mesa-libglapi-24.0.7-1.fc40.x86_64 from updates and mesa-libglapi-24.0.5-1.fc40.x86_64 from fedora
  - package mesa-libEGL-24.0.7-1.fc40.x86_64 from updates requires mesa-libglapi(x86-64) = 24.0.7-1.fc40, but none of the providers can be installed
  - cannot install the best update candidate for package qemu-ui-opengl-2:8.2.2-1.fc40.x86_64
  - cannot install the best update candidate for package mesa-libEGL-24.0.6-2.fc40.x86_64

Different constellations of deployed packages might differ a little in the output, but if your problem resembles this, you do not need to create a new report: the issue has been reported and is known, and the new package is also already built. Just give it some time. The update should work automatically soon. There is no need to do anything about it. The packages are also not marked as security relevant.

Related:
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6939

If you want to get the packages immediately for whatever reason, you can download them and install them manually at: mesa-freeworld-24.0.7-1.fc40 | Build Info | koji (you also can give dnf http links: e.g., dnf update https://abc/package1.rpm https://abc/package1.rpm)

However, as usual, the general suggestion is to wait until these packages have been pushed to their stable repository. If you update them earlier, keep in mind that they are not yet marked stable.

4 Likes
2

Update pushed, issue solved (quicker than expected): if you still have the issue, do a refresh: dnf update --refresh

1 Like
3

Similar issue:

Check this answer

2 Likes
4

Don’t blame rpmfusion it’s fedora that caused the issue, mesa is critical package and shouldn’t be pushed straight to stable.
Maybe someone should file the issue at fedora bugzilla and request that they coordinate the update with rpmfusion.
It isn’t reasonable to expect me to do multiple pushes per week, my free time is limited and I’m not willing to let the other packages I maintain suffer as result.

3 Likes
5

So they break the stable fedora releases by pushing too soon, they haven’t pushed the update yet for F41 or Rawhide.

$ sudo dnf update
Updating and loading repositories:
Repositories loaded.
Problem 1: cannot install the best update candidate for package mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-24.2.0~rc4-1.fc41.x86_64
  - nothing provides mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 24.2.0 needed by mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-24.2.0-1.fc41.x86_64 from rpmfusion-free-updates-testing
 Problem 2: cannot install the best update candidate for package mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-24.2.0~rc4-1.fc41.i686
  - nothing provides mesa-filesystem(x86-32) = 24.2.0 needed by mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-24.2.0-1.fc41.i686 from rpmfusion-free-updates-testing
 Problem 3: cannot install the best update candidate for package mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld-24.2.0~rc4-1.fc41.x86_64
  - nothing provides mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 24.2.0 needed by mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld-24.2.0-1.fc41.x86_64 from rpmfusion-free-updates-testing

Package                                  Arch     Version                                   Repository                              Size
Skipping packages with broken dependencies:
 mesa-va-drivers-freeworld               i686     24.2.0-1.fc41                             rpmfusion-free-updates-testing      18.7 MiB
 mesa-va-drivers-freeworld               x86_64   24.2.0-1.fc41                             rpmfusion-free-updates-testing      17.8 MiB
 mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld            x86_64   24.2.0-1.fc41                             rpmfusion-free-updates-testing      17.7 MiB

Nothing to do.
1 Like
6

I think no one here is blaming you. Indeed, thanks very much for maintaining the package :classic_smiley:

If that is the case, I would say this is a mistake - or a super urgent security mitigation.

Does it maybe make sense if you and @jexposit (or another maintainer if there are others) of the Fedora package have a chat to maybe find a way to resolve such issues in future? Personally, I have no problem if the issue occurs from time to time, but once this reaches the point when it leads to hostilities & blaming (may it be among maintainers/contributors, or users who experience it), I think people should talk :classic_smiley:

One of the great opportunities we have here is to easily and quickly reach out to people. My experience is, if people don’t talk in such situations, relationships get worse and at the worst, develop destructive :frowning: That would be sad as both sides do great contributions to the community that deserve appreciation, and there are no doubts that both have only good intentions.

Also, all, this old topic is resolved, and it seems that there is already a new topic about this. So let’s leave this old one sleep :wink:

1 Like
7

I don’t maintain the mesa-freeworld package, I’m responsible for the admin tasks involved in pushing the packages eg: sign, mash and rsync to the main mirror.

2 Likes
8

Can automatic pushing be disabled for Fedora’s mesa packages so that they can be pushed to stable at the same time as RPM Fusion’s mesa packages? Currently they are automatically pushed after +3 karma and it usually gets it pretty quick. Automatic pushing is disabled for the kernel packages and I think the same can be applied to Fedora’s mesa packages.

9

I don’t understand the problem with pushing these. Why is updating the packages on your installation problematic?