Bug 1737469
| Summary: | builddep ignores module setting | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Miroslav Suchý <msuchy> |
| Component: | dnf | Assignee: | Jaroslav Mracek <jmracek> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | high | ||
| Version: | 30 | CC: | amatej, jberan, jmracek, jrohel, mblaha, mhatina, packaging-team-maint, pkratoch, ppisar, rpm-software-management, vmukhame |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Triaged |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | libdnf-0.37.2-2.fc30 | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2020-05-04 06:11:16 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
Miroslav Suchý
2019-08-05 12:54:25 UTC
Thank you very much for the report. Already 4 months ago we have a fix for it (https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libsolv/pull-request/4), but it was rejected by main administrator of libsolv downstream. Libsolv downstreams that are under dnf team control are patched. At the present time I have an alternative solution (https://github.com/rpm-software-management/libdnf/pull/692), but we will lose the reports about excluded packages. I have to develop an approach how to keep the reports. During testing of https://github.com/rpm-software-management/libdnf/pull/692 I discovered two problems: 1. Excludes of installed packages using solver_lock will not allow to upgrade downgrade locked packages. a. It could be positively used by versionlock plugin b. It changes behavior of dnf for a lot of operation c. I believe that such changes in behavior are suitable for dnf5 2. Reports about solver errors get less informative or more confusing with incorrect conflict. Original libdnf ============================================================================================================================================================== udo dnf --installroot /tmp/testsolv --nogpgcheck --releasever 30 --nobest upgrade -x glibc-common-0:2.29-22.fc30.x86_64 Dependencies resolved. Problem 1: package glibc-all-langpacks-2.29-22.fc30.x86_64 requires glibc-common = 2.29-22.fc30, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package glibc-all-langpacks-2.29-9.fc30.x86_64 - package glibc-common-2.29-22.fc30.x86_64 is excluded Problem 2: package glibc-2.29-22.fc30.x86_64 requires glibc-common = 2.29-22.fc30, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package glibc-2.29-9.fc30.x86_64 - package glibc-common-2.29-22.fc30.x86_64 is excluded ==================================================================================================================== Package Architecture Version Repository Size ==================================================================================================================== Skipping packages with broken dependencies: glibc x86_64 2.29-22.fc30 upgrades 4.0 M glibc-all-langpacks x86_64 2.29-22.fc30 upgrades 25 M Transaction Summary ==================================================================================================================== Skip 2 Packages Nothing to do. Complete! sudo dnf --installroot /tmp/testsolv --nogpgcheck --releasever 30 --nobest upgrade -x glibc-common Dependencies resolved. Problem 1: package glibc-all-langpacks-2.29-22.fc30.x86_64 requires glibc-common = 2.29-22.fc30, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package glibc-all-langpacks-2.29-9.fc30.x86_64 - package glibc-common-2.29-22.fc30.x86_64 is excluded Problem 2: package glibc-2.29-22.fc30.x86_64 requires glibc-common = 2.29-22.fc30, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package glibc-2.29-9.fc30.x86_64 - package glibc-common-2.29-22.fc30.x86_64 is excluded ==================================================================================================================== Package Architecture Version Repository Size ==================================================================================================================== Skipping packages with broken dependencies: glibc x86_64 2.29-22.fc30 upgrades 4.0 M glibc-all-langpacks x86_64 2.29-22.fc30 upgrades 25 M Transaction Summary ==================================================================================================================== Skip 2 Packages Nothing to do. Complete! =========================================================================================================================================================================== libdnf using solver_lock =========================================================================================================================================================================== [jmracek@localhost testrepo]$ sudo dnf --installroot /tmp/testsolv --nogpgcheck --releasever 30 --nobest upgrade -x glibc-common-0:2.29-22.fc30.x86_64 Dependencies resolved. Problem: package glibc-all-langpacks-2.29-22.fc30.x86_64 requires glibc-common = 2.29-22.fc30, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package glibc-all-langpacks-2.29-9.fc30.x86_64 - conflicting requests ==================================================================================================================== Package Architecture Version Repository Size ==================================================================================================================== Skipping packages with broken dependencies: glibc-all-langpacks x86_64 2.29-22.fc30 upgrades 25 M Transaction Summary ==================================================================================================================== Skip 1 Package Nothing to do. Complete! [jmracek@localhost testrepo]$ sudo dnf --installroot /tmp/testsolv --nogpgcheck --releasever 30 --nobest upgrade --disablerepo=* --repofrompath=upgrades,$(pwd) -x glibc-common Added upgrades repo from /tmp/testrepo Last metadata expiration check: 0:07:14 ago on Fri 13 Sep 2019 10:02:07 AM CEST. Dependencies resolved. Problem 1: package glibc-all-langpacks-2.29-22.fc30.x86_64 requires glibc-common = 2.29-22.fc30, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package glibc-all-langpacks-2.29-9.fc30.x86_64 - conflicting requests Problem 2: cannot install both glibc-2.29-22.fc30.x86_64 and glibc-2.29-9.fc30.x86_64 - package glibc-common-2.29-9.fc30.x86_64 requires glibc = 2.29-9.fc30, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package glibc-2.29-9.fc30.x86_64 - conflicting requests ==================================================================================================================== Package Architecture Version Repository Size ==================================================================================================================== Skipping packages with conflicts: (add '--best --allowerasing' to command line to force their upgrade): glibc x86_64 2.29-22.fc30 upgrades 4.0 M Skipping packages with broken dependencies: glibc-all-langpacks x86_64 2.29-22.fc30 upgrades 25 M Transaction Summary ==================================================================================================================== Skip 2 Packages Nothing to do. Complete! =========================================================================================================================================================================== Thanks a lot to Michael Schroeder, I am able to resolve the issue (https://github.com/rpm-software-management/libdnf/pull/814). Michael implemented POOL_FLAG_WHATPROVIDESWITHDISABLED flag that filtrate best candidates correctly. The patch requires libsolv-0.7.7. Patches were backported into Fedora rawhide. FEDORA-2019-7cafbe66ba has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-7cafbe66ba FEDORA-2019-94393775ec has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-94393775ec dnf-4.2.15-1.fc30, dnf-plugins-core-4.0.11-1.fc30, dnf-plugins-extras-4.0.8-1.fc30, libdnf-0.37.2-2.fc30, librepo-1.11.0-1.fc30, microdnf-3.0.2-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-7cafbe66ba dnf-4.2.15-1.fc31, dnf-plugins-core-4.0.11-1.fc31, dnf-plugins-extras-4.0.8-1.fc31, libdnf-0.37.2-2.fc31, librepo-1.11.0-1.fc31, microdnf-3.0.2-1.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-94393775ec FEDORA-2019-7cafbe66ba has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-7cafbe66ba FEDORA-2019-94393775ec has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-94393775ec dnf-4.2.15-3.fc30, dnf-plugins-core-4.0.11-1.fc30, dnf-plugins-extras-4.0.8-1.fc30, libdnf-0.37.2-2.fc30, librepo-1.11.0-1.fc30, microdnf-3.0.2-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-7cafbe66ba dnf-4.2.15-2.fc31, dnf-plugins-core-4.0.11-1.fc31, dnf-plugins-extras-4.0.8-1.fc31, libdnf-0.37.2-2.fc31, librepo-1.11.0-1.fc31, microdnf-3.0.2-1.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-94393775ec dnf-4.2.15-2.fc31, dnf-plugins-core-4.0.11-1.fc31, dnf-plugins-extras-4.0.8-1.fc31, libdnf-0.37.2-2.fc31, librepo-1.11.0-1.fc31, microdnf-3.0.2-1.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. dnf-4.2.15-3.fc30, dnf-plugins-core-4.0.11-1.fc30, dnf-plugins-extras-4.0.8-1.fc30, libdnf-0.37.2-2.fc30, librepo-1.11.0-1.fc30, microdnf-3.0.2-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. This message is a reminder that Fedora 30 is nearing its end of life. Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 30 on 2020-05-26. 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 '30'. 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 30 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. |