Bug 1300351

Summary: Unsatisfied requirement for nodejs010-nodejs-is-finite on RHEL-6
Product: Red Hat Software Collections Reporter: Miroslav Hradílek <mhradile>
Component: nodejsAssignee: Tomas Hrcka <thrcka>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact: Miroslav Hradílek <mhradile>
Severity: high Docs Contact:
Priority: high    
Version: nodejs010CC: jorton, kanderso, lkuprova, mhradile
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: 2.1   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-04-06 14:03:32 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:

Description Miroslav Hradílek 2016-01-20 14:27:50 UTC
Description of problem:
For some reason on RHEL-7 the package "nodejs010-nodejs-number-is-nan" provides the "scl-package(nodejs010)" required by "nodejs010-nodejs-is-finite" while on RHEL-6 the package is missing tzhos provide but "is-finite" still requires it.

This breaks installation with yum.

Steps to Reproduce:
$ yum install nodejs010-nodejs-nodemon
. . .
--> Finished Dependency Resolution
Error: Package: nodejs010-nodejs-is-finite-1.0.1-4.el6.noarch (rhscl-server)
           Requires: nodejs010-npm(number-is-nan)
 You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem
 You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest

On 6:
$ rpm -q --provides nodejs010-nodejs-number-is-nan
nodejs010-nodejs-number-is-nan = 1.0.0
nodejs010-nodejs-number-is-nan = 1.0.0-3.el6

On 7:
$ rpm -q --provides nodejs010-nodejs-number-is-nan
nodejs010-nodejs-number-is-nan = 1.0.0
nodejs010-nodejs-number-is-nan = 1.0.0-3.el7
nodejs010-npm(number-is-nan) = 1.0.0
scl-package(nodejs010)


Additional info:
Maybe different versions of scl-utils but how come "is-finite" requires it?

Comment 1 Joe Orton 2016-03-23 14:27:04 UTC
Is this still a current issue or was it fixed in the recent nodejs010 errata?

Comment 2 Miroslav Hradílek 2016-03-30 15:10:27 UTC
I believe it was fixed it just was not added to erratum. I'd close this current release.