Fedora 29 VirtualBox Installation Malfunction
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
The only Fedora 29 specific instructions that I found are at this link:
https://www.if-not-true-then-false.com/2010/install-virtualbox-guest-additions-on-fedora-centos-red-hat-rhel/
Since that link is apparently focused on guest additions, I decided to ignore it.
A year ago, I successfully installed VirtualBox in Fedora 26 by following instructions that were similar to the following link: https://www.if-not-true-then-false.com/2010/install-virtualbox-with-yum-on-fedora-centos-red-hat-rhel/
Since I couldn't find corresponding instructions specifically for Fedora 29, I
attempted to follow the same instructions. First, I executed the following
command:
dnf install binutils gcc make patch libgomp glibc-headers glibc-devel kernel-headers kernel-devel dkms
Although the command appeared to complete normally, it did show the following message:
Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'virtualbox', ignoring this repo.
I then executed:
dnf install VirtualBox-5.2
Results:
Fedora 29 - x86_64 - VirtualBox
Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'virtualbox', ignoring this repo.
Last metadata expiration check: 0:05:45 ago on Sat 17 Nov 2018 03:40:42 PM PST.
No match for argument: VirtualBox-5.2
Error: Unable to find a match
I am not sure if this is relevant, but just out of curiosity, I executed
cd /
find -type f -iname "virtualbox.*"
find -type f -iname "virtualbox*"
Results:
./var/cache/PackageKit/29/metadata/updates-29-x86_64/packages/virtualbox-guest-additions-5.2.20-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm
./var/cache/PackageKit/29/metadata/updates-29-x86_64/packages/virtualbox-guest-additions-5.2.22-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm
It seems as if Fedora 29 (complete install, not upgrade) is installing some
VirtualBox Guest-Addition rpm's. I will post a separate query re what I should do to install guest additions once I've got VirtualBox installed. I mention it in this posting only as it might relate to my specific problem.
Similarly, I'm unsure whether the following link is relevant:
VirtualBox failed to install in Fedora 26
In that link, I made a mistake and got UnixSE responses about backing out my
mistake before I did the install.
Questions:
Why am I getting the message "Failed to synchronize cache for repo virtualbox"?
Why am I getting the message "No match for argument: VirtualBox-5.2"?
Do I need to back anything out before I proceed with the install?
How do I install VirtualBox in Fedora 29.
fedora software-installation virtualbox
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
The only Fedora 29 specific instructions that I found are at this link:
https://www.if-not-true-then-false.com/2010/install-virtualbox-guest-additions-on-fedora-centos-red-hat-rhel/
Since that link is apparently focused on guest additions, I decided to ignore it.
A year ago, I successfully installed VirtualBox in Fedora 26 by following instructions that were similar to the following link: https://www.if-not-true-then-false.com/2010/install-virtualbox-with-yum-on-fedora-centos-red-hat-rhel/
Since I couldn't find corresponding instructions specifically for Fedora 29, I
attempted to follow the same instructions. First, I executed the following
command:
dnf install binutils gcc make patch libgomp glibc-headers glibc-devel kernel-headers kernel-devel dkms
Although the command appeared to complete normally, it did show the following message:
Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'virtualbox', ignoring this repo.
I then executed:
dnf install VirtualBox-5.2
Results:
Fedora 29 - x86_64 - VirtualBox
Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'virtualbox', ignoring this repo.
Last metadata expiration check: 0:05:45 ago on Sat 17 Nov 2018 03:40:42 PM PST.
No match for argument: VirtualBox-5.2
Error: Unable to find a match
I am not sure if this is relevant, but just out of curiosity, I executed
cd /
find -type f -iname "virtualbox.*"
find -type f -iname "virtualbox*"
Results:
./var/cache/PackageKit/29/metadata/updates-29-x86_64/packages/virtualbox-guest-additions-5.2.20-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm
./var/cache/PackageKit/29/metadata/updates-29-x86_64/packages/virtualbox-guest-additions-5.2.22-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm
It seems as if Fedora 29 (complete install, not upgrade) is installing some
VirtualBox Guest-Addition rpm's. I will post a separate query re what I should do to install guest additions once I've got VirtualBox installed. I mention it in this posting only as it might relate to my specific problem.
Similarly, I'm unsure whether the following link is relevant:
VirtualBox failed to install in Fedora 26
In that link, I made a mistake and got UnixSE responses about backing out my
mistake before I did the install.
Questions:
Why am I getting the message "Failed to synchronize cache for repo virtualbox"?
Why am I getting the message "No match for argument: VirtualBox-5.2"?
Do I need to back anything out before I proceed with the install?
How do I install VirtualBox in Fedora 29.
fedora software-installation virtualbox
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
The only Fedora 29 specific instructions that I found are at this link:
https://www.if-not-true-then-false.com/2010/install-virtualbox-guest-additions-on-fedora-centos-red-hat-rhel/
Since that link is apparently focused on guest additions, I decided to ignore it.
A year ago, I successfully installed VirtualBox in Fedora 26 by following instructions that were similar to the following link: https://www.if-not-true-then-false.com/2010/install-virtualbox-with-yum-on-fedora-centos-red-hat-rhel/
Since I couldn't find corresponding instructions specifically for Fedora 29, I
attempted to follow the same instructions. First, I executed the following
command:
dnf install binutils gcc make patch libgomp glibc-headers glibc-devel kernel-headers kernel-devel dkms
Although the command appeared to complete normally, it did show the following message:
Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'virtualbox', ignoring this repo.
I then executed:
dnf install VirtualBox-5.2
Results:
Fedora 29 - x86_64 - VirtualBox
Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'virtualbox', ignoring this repo.
Last metadata expiration check: 0:05:45 ago on Sat 17 Nov 2018 03:40:42 PM PST.
No match for argument: VirtualBox-5.2
Error: Unable to find a match
I am not sure if this is relevant, but just out of curiosity, I executed
cd /
find -type f -iname "virtualbox.*"
find -type f -iname "virtualbox*"
Results:
./var/cache/PackageKit/29/metadata/updates-29-x86_64/packages/virtualbox-guest-additions-5.2.20-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm
./var/cache/PackageKit/29/metadata/updates-29-x86_64/packages/virtualbox-guest-additions-5.2.22-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm
It seems as if Fedora 29 (complete install, not upgrade) is installing some
VirtualBox Guest-Addition rpm's. I will post a separate query re what I should do to install guest additions once I've got VirtualBox installed. I mention it in this posting only as it might relate to my specific problem.
Similarly, I'm unsure whether the following link is relevant:
VirtualBox failed to install in Fedora 26
In that link, I made a mistake and got UnixSE responses about backing out my
mistake before I did the install.
Questions:
Why am I getting the message "Failed to synchronize cache for repo virtualbox"?
Why am I getting the message "No match for argument: VirtualBox-5.2"?
Do I need to back anything out before I proceed with the install?
How do I install VirtualBox in Fedora 29.
fedora software-installation virtualbox
The only Fedora 29 specific instructions that I found are at this link:
https://www.if-not-true-then-false.com/2010/install-virtualbox-guest-additions-on-fedora-centos-red-hat-rhel/
Since that link is apparently focused on guest additions, I decided to ignore it.
A year ago, I successfully installed VirtualBox in Fedora 26 by following instructions that were similar to the following link: https://www.if-not-true-then-false.com/2010/install-virtualbox-with-yum-on-fedora-centos-red-hat-rhel/
Since I couldn't find corresponding instructions specifically for Fedora 29, I
attempted to follow the same instructions. First, I executed the following
command:
dnf install binutils gcc make patch libgomp glibc-headers glibc-devel kernel-headers kernel-devel dkms
Although the command appeared to complete normally, it did show the following message:
Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'virtualbox', ignoring this repo.
I then executed:
dnf install VirtualBox-5.2
Results:
Fedora 29 - x86_64 - VirtualBox
Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'virtualbox', ignoring this repo.
Last metadata expiration check: 0:05:45 ago on Sat 17 Nov 2018 03:40:42 PM PST.
No match for argument: VirtualBox-5.2
Error: Unable to find a match
I am not sure if this is relevant, but just out of curiosity, I executed
cd /
find -type f -iname "virtualbox.*"
find -type f -iname "virtualbox*"
Results:
./var/cache/PackageKit/29/metadata/updates-29-x86_64/packages/virtualbox-guest-additions-5.2.20-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm
./var/cache/PackageKit/29/metadata/updates-29-x86_64/packages/virtualbox-guest-additions-5.2.22-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm
It seems as if Fedora 29 (complete install, not upgrade) is installing some
VirtualBox Guest-Addition rpm's. I will post a separate query re what I should do to install guest additions once I've got VirtualBox installed. I mention it in this posting only as it might relate to my specific problem.
Similarly, I'm unsure whether the following link is relevant:
VirtualBox failed to install in Fedora 26
In that link, I made a mistake and got UnixSE responses about backing out my
mistake before I did the install.
Questions:
Why am I getting the message "Failed to synchronize cache for repo virtualbox"?
Why am I getting the message "No match for argument: VirtualBox-5.2"?
Do I need to back anything out before I proceed with the install?
How do I install VirtualBox in Fedora 29.
fedora software-installation virtualbox
fedora software-installation virtualbox
asked Nov 18 at 0:58
user2661923
179113
179113
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Looking at the raw repo at http://download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/ they don't seem to support 29 yet, only up to F28. You should be able to edit the repo file and change $releasever to 28 and then dnf install VirtualBox-5.2 .
@AaronDMarasco Aaron, thanks for the analysis. Your approached worked but revealed an underlying problem. When I re-attempteddnf install VirtualBox-5.2, I got several error messages similar to Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides libvpx.so.4()(64bit) needed by VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.0_118431_fedora26-1.x86_64. I will wait a couple of months and then re-try. It looks like your analysis answered my question 2. I also welcome an answer for question 1.
– user2661923
Nov 18 at 1:14
Question 1 is because download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/29 is not a valid URL; it doesn't exist on the repo site. download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/28 is where I indicated you should point to. Some sources for your missing library can be found at rpmfind.net/linux/rpm2html/…
– Aaron D. Marasco
Nov 18 at 1:24
@AaronDMarasco Aaron, thanks again. For others: Following Aaron's original answer, my re-try did in fact point to ../rpm/fedora/28, which is why the re-try got different errors. I suspect that it will be cleaner simply to wait a few months and then re-try.
– user2661923
Nov 18 at 3:04
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Looking at the raw repo at http://download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/ they don't seem to support 29 yet, only up to F28. You should be able to edit the repo file and change $releasever to 28 and then dnf install VirtualBox-5.2 .
@AaronDMarasco Aaron, thanks for the analysis. Your approached worked but revealed an underlying problem. When I re-attempteddnf install VirtualBox-5.2, I got several error messages similar to Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides libvpx.so.4()(64bit) needed by VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.0_118431_fedora26-1.x86_64. I will wait a couple of months and then re-try. It looks like your analysis answered my question 2. I also welcome an answer for question 1.
– user2661923
Nov 18 at 1:14
Question 1 is because download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/29 is not a valid URL; it doesn't exist on the repo site. download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/28 is where I indicated you should point to. Some sources for your missing library can be found at rpmfind.net/linux/rpm2html/…
– Aaron D. Marasco
Nov 18 at 1:24
@AaronDMarasco Aaron, thanks again. For others: Following Aaron's original answer, my re-try did in fact point to ../rpm/fedora/28, which is why the re-try got different errors. I suspect that it will be cleaner simply to wait a few months and then re-try.
– user2661923
Nov 18 at 3:04
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Looking at the raw repo at http://download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/ they don't seem to support 29 yet, only up to F28. You should be able to edit the repo file and change $releasever to 28 and then dnf install VirtualBox-5.2 .
@AaronDMarasco Aaron, thanks for the analysis. Your approached worked but revealed an underlying problem. When I re-attempteddnf install VirtualBox-5.2, I got several error messages similar to Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides libvpx.so.4()(64bit) needed by VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.0_118431_fedora26-1.x86_64. I will wait a couple of months and then re-try. It looks like your analysis answered my question 2. I also welcome an answer for question 1.
– user2661923
Nov 18 at 1:14
Question 1 is because download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/29 is not a valid URL; it doesn't exist on the repo site. download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/28 is where I indicated you should point to. Some sources for your missing library can be found at rpmfind.net/linux/rpm2html/…
– Aaron D. Marasco
Nov 18 at 1:24
@AaronDMarasco Aaron, thanks again. For others: Following Aaron's original answer, my re-try did in fact point to ../rpm/fedora/28, which is why the re-try got different errors. I suspect that it will be cleaner simply to wait a few months and then re-try.
– user2661923
Nov 18 at 3:04
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Looking at the raw repo at http://download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/ they don't seem to support 29 yet, only up to F28. You should be able to edit the repo file and change $releasever to 28 and then dnf install VirtualBox-5.2 .
Looking at the raw repo at http://download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/ they don't seem to support 29 yet, only up to F28. You should be able to edit the repo file and change $releasever to 28 and then dnf install VirtualBox-5.2 .
answered Nov 18 at 1:03
Aaron D. Marasco
3,5581421
3,5581421
@AaronDMarasco Aaron, thanks for the analysis. Your approached worked but revealed an underlying problem. When I re-attempteddnf install VirtualBox-5.2, I got several error messages similar to Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides libvpx.so.4()(64bit) needed by VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.0_118431_fedora26-1.x86_64. I will wait a couple of months and then re-try. It looks like your analysis answered my question 2. I also welcome an answer for question 1.
– user2661923
Nov 18 at 1:14
Question 1 is because download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/29 is not a valid URL; it doesn't exist on the repo site. download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/28 is where I indicated you should point to. Some sources for your missing library can be found at rpmfind.net/linux/rpm2html/…
– Aaron D. Marasco
Nov 18 at 1:24
@AaronDMarasco Aaron, thanks again. For others: Following Aaron's original answer, my re-try did in fact point to ../rpm/fedora/28, which is why the re-try got different errors. I suspect that it will be cleaner simply to wait a few months and then re-try.
– user2661923
Nov 18 at 3:04
add a comment |
@AaronDMarasco Aaron, thanks for the analysis. Your approached worked but revealed an underlying problem. When I re-attempteddnf install VirtualBox-5.2, I got several error messages similar to Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides libvpx.so.4()(64bit) needed by VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.0_118431_fedora26-1.x86_64. I will wait a couple of months and then re-try. It looks like your analysis answered my question 2. I also welcome an answer for question 1.
– user2661923
Nov 18 at 1:14
Question 1 is because download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/29 is not a valid URL; it doesn't exist on the repo site. download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/28 is where I indicated you should point to. Some sources for your missing library can be found at rpmfind.net/linux/rpm2html/…
– Aaron D. Marasco
Nov 18 at 1:24
@AaronDMarasco Aaron, thanks again. For others: Following Aaron's original answer, my re-try did in fact point to ../rpm/fedora/28, which is why the re-try got different errors. I suspect that it will be cleaner simply to wait a few months and then re-try.
– user2661923
Nov 18 at 3:04
@AaronDMarasco Aaron, thanks for the analysis. Your approached worked but revealed an underlying problem. When I re-attempted
dnf install VirtualBox-5.2, I got several error messages similar to Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides libvpx.so.4()(64bit) needed by VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.0_118431_fedora26-1.x86_64. I will wait a couple of months and then re-try. It looks like your analysis answered my question 2. I also welcome an answer for question 1.– user2661923
Nov 18 at 1:14
@AaronDMarasco Aaron, thanks for the analysis. Your approached worked but revealed an underlying problem. When I re-attempted
dnf install VirtualBox-5.2, I got several error messages similar to Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides libvpx.so.4()(64bit) needed by VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.0_118431_fedora26-1.x86_64. I will wait a couple of months and then re-try. It looks like your analysis answered my question 2. I also welcome an answer for question 1.– user2661923
Nov 18 at 1:14
Question 1 is because download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/29 is not a valid URL; it doesn't exist on the repo site. download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/28 is where I indicated you should point to. Some sources for your missing library can be found at rpmfind.net/linux/rpm2html/…
– Aaron D. Marasco
Nov 18 at 1:24
Question 1 is because download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/29 is not a valid URL; it doesn't exist on the repo site. download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/rpm/fedora/28 is where I indicated you should point to. Some sources for your missing library can be found at rpmfind.net/linux/rpm2html/…
– Aaron D. Marasco
Nov 18 at 1:24
@AaronDMarasco Aaron, thanks again. For others: Following Aaron's original answer, my re-try did in fact point to ../rpm/fedora/28, which is why the re-try got different errors. I suspect that it will be cleaner simply to wait a few months and then re-try.
– user2661923
Nov 18 at 3:04
@AaronDMarasco Aaron, thanks again. For others: Following Aaron's original answer, my re-try did in fact point to ../rpm/fedora/28, which is why the re-try got different errors. I suspect that it will be cleaner simply to wait a few months and then re-try.
– user2661923
Nov 18 at 3:04
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f482441%2ffedora-29-virtualbox-installation-malfunction%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown