Bug 472631

Summary:	Needs libgcrypt >= 1.4.3
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Braden McDaniel <braden>
Component:	gnutls	Assignee:	Tomas Mraz <tmraz>
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	rawhide	CC:	jorton, tmraz
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	Reopened
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2008-11-22 20:13:54 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 Braden McDaniel 2008-11-22 04:58:58 UTC

Description of problem:
Trying to run gnutls-2.4.2-2.fc10 with libgcypt-1.4.0-3 results in a runtime error like this:

svn: relocation error: /usr/lib64/libgnutls.so.26: symbol gcry_cipher_setkey, version GCRYPT_1.2 not defined in file libgcrypt.so.11 with link time reference

Updating to libgcrypt-1.4.2-2.fc10 resolves the problem.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
2.4.2-2.fc10

Comment 1 Tomas Mraz 2008-11-22 16:26:44 UTC

But we have libgcrypt-1.4.3 in Fedora 10 prereleases and Rawhide. So I don't understand what is the problem.

Comment 2 Braden McDaniel 2008-11-22 18:32:06 UTC

The problem is that this sort of relationship is exactly what dependencies are for.  Maintaining correct dependencies maintains the correctness of the spec file and the resiliency of the package.  It ensures that updates that may not fall neatly into the categories you've envisioned can still succeed.

What exactly is the argument against reflecting this dependency in the spec file?

Comment 3 Tomas Mraz 2008-11-22 20:13:54 UTC

Unfortunately this would have to be fixed by moving the gcry_cipher_setkey to a new symbol version. We cannot do that. And hardcoding the dependency on libgcrypt >=1.4.2 would not be correct either.

Comment 4 Braden McDaniel 2008-11-22 20:41:35 UTC

Pardon my ignorance, but why wouldn't "Requires: libgcrypt >= 1.4.2" be correct?

Comment 5 Tomas Mraz 2008-11-22 20:46:32 UTC

Because if you compile it against libgcrypt-1.4.0 or whatever it will compile OK and not require libgcrypt >= 1.4.2 (the gcry_cipher_setkey() was changed from macro to function in libgcrypt-1.4.2).

Comment 6 Braden McDaniel 2008-11-22 22:58:31 UTC

Then couple it with BuildRequires: libgrypt-devel >= 1.4.2.

It may be ugly, but it's less ugly than simply having this dependency go undocumented and unenforced.