Bug 2048085

Summary:	etckeeper-brz provides python3dist(brz-etckeeper) = 0, etckeeper-dnf provides python3dist(dnf-etckeeper) = 0
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Miro Hrončok <mhroncok>
Component:	etckeeper	Assignee:	Thomas Moschny <thomas.moschny>
Status:	CLOSED RAWHIDE	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	rawhide	CC:	thomas.moschny
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:	2022-01-31 20:49:12 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:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	2048077

Description Miro Hrončok 2022-01-29 12:13:42 UTC

The package etckeeper-brz has the following automatic provide:

  python3dist(brz-etckeeper) = 0

The package etckeeper-dnf has the following automatic provide:

  python3dist(dnf-etckeeper) = 0

It appears that the actual package version was lost during the packaging process. 

In most cases, this is caused by using a Source that misses version information, e.g. A GitHub tarball when the project uses setuptools_scm or pbr. See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_source_files_from_pypi

This bugzilla was created in a batch, so it does not have information about the exact cause for this package. If you need help figuring out why this happens in this particular package, feel free to ask.

Comment 1 Thomas Moschny 2022-01-31 08:42:56 UTC

Not sure what to do here. Both are more or less single-file plugins for etckeeper, and not really standalone packages.

While dnf-etckeeper at least comes with etckeeper, and thus one could simply assign it the same version number [1], brz-etckeeper only exists as a patch with no real upstream...

[1] although I'd have to figure out how to do that technically first

Comment 2 Miro Hrončok 2022-01-31 09:45:39 UTC

Technically, the version is stored in /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/dnf_etckeeper-0.0.0-py3.10.egg-info

Metadata-Version: 1.0
Name: dnf-etckeeper
Version: 0.0.0
Summary: UNKNOWN
Home-page: UNKNOWN
Author: UNKNOWN
Author-email: UNKNOWN
License: UNKNOWN
Description: UNKNOWN
Platform: UNKNOWN



I believe the culprit is that the package uses etckeeper-brz/__init__.py and  etckeeper-dnf/etckeeper.py as setup.py and neither has any version information.


If the metadata is not used by any part of etckeeper, I suggest simply rm'ing both egg-infos in %install with the reference to this bugzilla.

Comment 3 Thomas Moschny 2022-01-31 10:47:25 UTC

(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #2)
> If the metadata is not used by any part of etckeeper, I suggest simply
> rm'ing both egg-infos in %install with the reference to this bugzilla.

brz-etckeeper is actually a breezy plugin and dnf-etckeeper a dnf plugin. Probably both do not care about the version number. Need to check that.

Comment 4 Thomas Moschny 2022-01-31 20:49:12 UTC

Fixed: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/etckeeper/c/8e0916c332740c23397a60f530bf9b797acca1a0?branch=rawhide

Comment 5 Miro Hrončok 2022-01-31 23:49:44 UTC

Thanks!