Bug 2319139

Summary: weird deprecation message to end users that can't do anything
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Peter Robinson <pbrobinson>
Component: rpmAssignee: Packaging Maintenance Team <packaging-team-maint>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: rawhideCC: igor.raits, mdomonko, ovirt, packaging-team-maint, pmatilai
Target Milestone: ---   
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: 2024-10-23 15:49:52 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Peter Robinson 2024-10-16 12:14:28 UTC
So in recent version of rpm when upgrading certain packages, either via dnf or rpm you get the following output to the user on the commandline:

warning: posix.fork(): .fork(), .exec(), .wait() and .redirect2null() are deprecated, use rpm.spawn() or rpm.execute() instead
warning: posix.wait(): .fork(), .exec(), .wait() and .redirect2null() are deprecated, use rpm.spawn() or rpm.execute() instead
warning: posix.exec(): .fork(), .exec(), .wait() and .redirect2null() are deprecated, use rpm.spawn() or rpm.execute() instead

While they might be deprecated there is nothing that the user can do about it so it just provides confusion, these sort of deprecated messages should be output as part of the rpmbuild process to alert the rpm maintainer, as they are the ones that can do something about it, that something needs to be updated in their packages.

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Update packages using the cli via dnf/rpm such as the kernel


Expected Results:  
Clean output for users without information they can do nothing about

Comment 1 Michal Domonkos 2024-10-23 15:49:52 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 2291869 ***