Bug 1666835
| Summary: | Problem handling architecture compatibility | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Romain Forlot <claneys> |
| Component: | dnf | Assignee: | Jaroslav Mracek <jmracek> |
| Status: | CLOSED EOL | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 29 | CC: | dmach, jmracek, jrohel, mblaha, mhatina, packaging-team-maint, pkratoch, rpm-software-management, vmukhame |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Reopened, Triaged |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2019-11-27 23:04:31 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: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Romain Forlot
2019-01-16 17:12:54 UTC
According to your proposal I created a pull-request (https://github.com/openSUSE/libsolv/pull/310) for libsolv. Hum, this is not the good way I think and more a temporary workaround. Because "m3ulcb" is just one of the possibilities. As I said before, the problem comes from the way Yocto builds the packages and marks the BSP packages with the name of the machine instead of the architecture. An image built for the machine/board "m3ulcb" will produce kernel, kernel modules and such packages with "m3ulcb" for the architecture and all others packages with aarch64. Anyway, could we have a way to specify compatibility between arch with a files like for RPM with the "rpmrc" file which gives you the ability to specify such things. I would have even thought that it should works with the file /etc/dnf/vars/arch but no. According to conversation in https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/645#event-2228670021 we should considered it as a unsupported user case. Additionally it would requires changes in RPM, LIBDNF, LIBSOLV therefore it is to complicate and difficult to convince community about importance of the implementation. I also believe that there are different approaches how to mark specific builds from certain machine. Please try to use a vendor or a disttag. Probably there is a way how to implement in easily. See https://github.com/openSUSE/libsolv/pull/310#issuecomment-476596610 This message is a reminder that Fedora 29 is nearing its end of life. Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 29 on 2019-11-26. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '29'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 29 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. Fedora 29 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2019-11-26. Fedora 29 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed. |