Bug 119783

Summary: rpm --test returns "error: can't create transaction lock" when run without root privs
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Gregory Leblanc <gleblanc>
Component: rpmAssignee: Jeff Johnson <jbj>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact: Mike McLean <mikem>
Severity: low Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: h1k6zn2m, mitr
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2004-04-07 23:49:52 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 114963    

Description Gregory Leblanc 2004-04-02 05:59:47 UTC
Description of problem:
Running 'rpm --test -Uvh somepackage.rpm' as a non-root user now
returns "error: can't create transaction lock".  Prior versions did
not return an error.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
rpm-4.3-0.22

How reproducible:
Always

Comment 1 Bill Nottingham 2004-04-06 03:38:16 UTC
Any SELinux error messages?

Comment 2 Gregory Leblanc 2004-04-06 05:35:09 UTC
In the logs, or on the console?  The console reports only the
transaction lock error.

From chatting with Jeff about this a bit, it seems that --test does
what it has always done, and it "works" doing that, despite this
error.  I haven't verified that personally, though it's on my list. 
If I understood correctly, he also said this was due to some internal
changes in RPM and not due to something else (though I did not ask
about SELinux).  

Comment 3 Miloslav Trmac 2004-04-06 17:05:22 UTC
This happens even with SELinux completely disabled 
(In particular, I have tried rpm -ev --test boost).

Comment 4 Jeff Johnson 2004-04-07 23:49:52 UTC
Fixed in rpm-4.3.1-0.2 when built.

Comment 5 Jeff Johnson 2004-04-09 14:01:11 UTC
*** Bug 120496 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***