Bug 2279854
| Summary: | Dehydrated dependency issue on EL8 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora EPEL | Reporter: | Gertjan Bijl <gertjan.bijl> |
| Component: | dehydrated | Assignee: | Robert Scheck <redhat-bugzilla> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | epel8 | CC: | paul.wouters, redhat-bugzilla |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | x86_64 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | dehydrated-0.7.1-6.fc42 dehydrated-0.7.1-6.el8 | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2024-12-26 21:37:54 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
Gertjan Bijl
2024-05-09 09:33:20 UTC
Honestly, I'm in doubt that you are installing dehydrated really from EPEL 8, because: # dnf install dehydrated Last metadata expiration check: 0:01:36 ago on Thu May 9 17:46:41 2024. Dependencies resolved. ================================================================================ Package Architecture Version Repository Size ================================================================================ Installing: dehydrated noarch 0.7.1-1.el8 epel 130 k Installing dependencies: openssl x86_64 1:1.1.1k-9.el8_7 baseos 709 k s-nail x86_64 14.9.23-1.el8 epel 616 k Transaction Summary ================================================================================ Install 3 Packages Total size: 1.4 M Installed size: 2.5 M Is this ok [y/N]: You are absolutely right, my apologies (and also my appologies for the late response, I was on vacation in between).
All our systems are behind Red Hat Satellite / Foreman, with filters on EPEL, so the s-nail package was unavailable. However, I expected the default mailx-package to be sufficient as a dependency, but instead, way worse thing happen. Let me explain.
Situation:
- Brand new Rocky 8.10 minimal system, direct internet connection (no Satellite/Foreman), only updated and rebooted once.
- Installed epel-release.
Now I install mailx, as we have that on our production servers:
[root@rocky8 ~]# yum install mailx
Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:14 ago on Mon 03 Jun 2024 11:15:58 AM CEST.
Dependencies resolved.
==============================================================================================================================================================================================================================================
Package Architecture Version Repository Size
==============================================================================================================================================================================================================================================
Installing:
mailx x86_64 12.5-29.el8 baseos 256 k
Transaction Summary
==============================================================================================================================================================================================================================================
Install 1 Package
Total download size: 256 k
Installed size: 474 k
Is this ok [y/N]: y
[..]
Installed:
mailx-12.5-29.el8.x86_64
Complete!
So far so good. Let me get the md5sum of the executable:
[root@rocky8 ~]# md5sum /usr/bin/mailx
bc25bfe29293d27c4eb0e38346fc3791 /usr/bin/mailx
Now I install dehydrated:
[root@rocky8 ~]# yum install dehydrated
Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:38 ago on Mon 03 Jun 2024 11:15:58 AM CEST.
Dependencies resolved.
==============================================================================================================================================================================================================================================
Package Architecture Version Repository Size
==============================================================================================================================================================================================================================================
Installing:
dehydrated noarch 0.7.1-1.el8 epel 130 k
Installing dependencies:
s-nail x86_64 14.9.23-1.el8 epel 616 k
Transaction Summary
==============================================================================================================================================================================================================================================
Install 2 Packages
Total download size: 747 k
Installed size: 1.3 M
Is this ok [y/N]: y
[..]
Installed:
dehydrated-0.7.1-1.el8.noarch s-nail-14.9.23-1.el8.x86_64
Complete!
Seems good as well, however:
[root@rocky8 ~]# md5sum /usr/bin/mailx
2a7e90d21ffdd5f7e776012743621ddb /usr/bin/mailx
The MD5sum of mailx has changed!
This seems to be caused by:
[root@rocky8 ~]# rpm -ql mailx | grep 'bin/mailx'
/bin/mailx
[root@rocky8 ~]# rpm -ql s-nail | grep 'bin/mailx'
/usr/bin/mailx
/usr/bin/mailx.s-nail
[root@rocky8 ~]# ls -als /bin
0 lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 7 Oct 11 2021 /bin -> usr/bin
DNF/RPM has no knowledge of the symlink from /bin to /usr/bin, and therefore it treats them as different files, causing s-nail to just bluntly overwrite mailx, while the mailx package is still installed.
This obviously is not an issue in the dehydrated package, but it points out why I want filters on EPEL, as not all packages play nicely with each other. I´d really like to see the mailx package from the base repository to be the dependency for dehydrated in EPEL8 again, and only use s-nail in EPEL9.
FEDORA-2024-faa30982c0 (dehydrated-0.7.1-6.fc42) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 42. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-faa30982c0 FEDORA-EPEL-2024-c21e2fa805 (dehydrated-0.7.1-6.el8) has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-c21e2fa805 FEDORA-2024-faa30982c0 (dehydrated-0.7.1-6.fc42) has been pushed to the Fedora 42 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. FEDORA-EPEL-2024-c21e2fa805 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-c21e2fa805 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. FEDORA-EPEL-2024-c21e2fa805 (dehydrated-0.7.1-6.el8) has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. |