Bug 1701923

Summary: sigul fails to build or install due to missing dependencies
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Miro Hrončok <mhroncok>
Component: sigulAssignee: Patrick Uiterwijk <puiterwijk>
Status: CLOSED EOL QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: rawhideCC: jflorian, jkeating, puiterwijk, releng
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2019-08-08 16:54:30 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1674516, 1690439, 1700317, 1700324, 1732841    

Description Miro Hrončok 2019-04-22 13:18:36 UTC
$ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 install sigul
...
Error: 
 Problem: conflicting requests
  - nothing provides python2-nss >= 0.11 needed by sigul-0.207-6.fc29.x86_64

Please fix this or retire the package.

Comment 1 Miro Hrončok 2019-04-29 20:06:11 UTC
A week has passed and this bug is still in the NEW state and the package does not install.

Please fix this or indicate that you are working ona  fix by setting the state to ASSIGNED.

After 3 such reminders, this package may be orphaned.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F31_Mass_Python_2_Package_Removal#Removing_non-installable_packages_from_the_distro

Thanks

Comment 2 Miro Hrončok 2019-05-06 14:15:02 UTC
In preparation for the Python 2 EOL, we are removing all non-installable Python 2 packages:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F31_Mass_Python_2_Package_Removal#Removing_non-installable_packages_from_the_distro

This bug is still in the NEW state and the package does not install. Please indicate you are working on a fix by setting the state to ASSIGNED. When this bug is four weeks in the NEW state, the package may be orphaned.

Note that you don't have to actually fix this right now, setting the bug to ASSIGNED will just mark this as being worked on, so I'll know it is being taken care of. If this happens too quickly, feel free to reach to me any time for help (with specific problems).

(My previous comment might have come across a bit too aggressive. I'm sorry, that was not my intention.)

(If you know for sure this package shall be removed, consider doing it.)

Thank You!

Comment 3 Miro Hrončok 2019-05-13 07:40:56 UTC
This bug is still in the NEW state and the package does not install. Please indicate you are working on a fix by setting the state to ASSIGNED. When this bug is four weeks in the NEW state, the package may be orphaned.

Comment 4 Miro Hrončok 2019-05-20 11:21:35 UTC
This bug is still in the NEW state and the package does not install. Please indicate you are working on a fix by setting the state to ASSIGNED. When this bug is four weeks in the NEW state, the package may be orphaned.

Comment 5 Patrick Uiterwijk 2019-05-20 19:13:09 UTC
So, I have a fix merged in fact that's waiting for a new release.
I'm trying to finish py3 support, and then I should have this released.

Comment 6 Patrick Uiterwijk 2019-05-20 19:13:33 UTC
*** Bug 1675996 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 7 Fedora Release Engineering 2019-08-08 16:54:30 UTC
The package was retired.

Comment 8 John Florian 2019-08-09 14:01:02 UTC
I am confused -- I read py3 support is coming and then I read sigul is retired.  Is there an alternative to sigul for signing koji builds?

Comment 9 Miro Hrončok 2019-08-09 14:09:27 UTC
Here: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails_to_install/

"A week before the mass branching, any packages which still have open FTBFS bugs from the previous release will be retired."

Once the package is ready to build again, it can be unretired.

The package wasn't installable, so not having it at all is not any worse.

Comment 10 John Florian 2019-08-09 16:01:20 UTC
Miro, thanks for responding!

I agree with the policy and rationale, but my understanding is that the Fedora Project uses (or used) sigul to sign its packages.  If FPO no longer uses sigul, I'd like to know what is used now or what alternatives exist since I need *something* to fill that role.

I am unaware of any other software that does this, but FPO *must* be using *something*.  I follow the rel-eng ML and haven't seen any discussion there about this nor do I get any hint with all the Google searches I've tried.  I asked on the devel ML once directly and didn't get a reply.  I was actually hoping sometime back that the FTBFS situation here would actually clear up some of these details, but it's almost as if they're being hidden, which seems very unlike the FPO or RH that I've known for eons.  Basically, I'm lost in the woods and can't find the next trail marker.

Comment 11 Miro Hrončok 2019-08-09 16:12:48 UTC
Unfortunately, I don't really know anything about sigul deployment. Since it doesn't install, I guess that either the signing doesn't happen on recent Fedora versions (aka rawhide packages are not signed with sigul running on rawhide) or the team has osme extra packages in the repo.

I'd help you if I knew this kind of things, but I don't. I'm sorry.