Bug 523135
Summary: | circular obsoletes in mstflint, perftest, and tvflash (again!) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 | Reporter: | Radek Bíba <rbiba> |
Component: | yum | Assignee: | James Antill <james.antill> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Petr Sklenar <psklenar> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 5.4 | CC: | atodorov, Colin.Simpson, dgregor, dledford, gozen, james.antill, jason.dunn, jburke, jhutar, jim, jlaska, jlee23, jswhite, mgahagan, philippe+bugzilla, psklenar, ralston, riek, syeghiay, tao, tis |
Target Milestone: | rc | Keywords: | Regression |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | 448772 | Environment: | |
Last Closed: | 2010-03-30 08:29:50 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: | |||
Bug Depends On: | 448772 | ||
Bug Blocks: |
Description
Radek Bíba
2009-09-14 08:45:43 UTC
Please note that as of rhel5.4, there was no update to mstflint or tvflash, and although perftest was updated, it did not have any changes to its list of obsoletes. If this problem has resurfaced then something either in the yum repos or yum itself has changed. We are seeing these circular updates too. I'm not sure I know quite when the obsolescence occurred and which one is now the correct one as both are in our updates (prefixed and non-prefixed openib-). But it looks like RH5.4 update of non prefixed openib-* components obsoletes openib-* versions. And then the base in our case pure RH5.0 openib-* obsoletes the 5.4 non prefixed openib-*. So for example, The 5.4 update tvflash-0.9.0-2.el5 obsoletes openib-tvflash Then the base (for me a 5.0) openib-tvflash-0.9.1-5.el5 obsoletes tvflash Here are two subsequent runs of yum update and what we get: Installed: mstflint.i386 0:1.4-1.el5 mstflint.x86_64 0:1.4-1.el5 perftest.i386 0:1.2-14.el5 perftest.x86_64 0:1.2-14.el5 tvflash.i386 0:0.9.0-2.el5 tvflash.x86_64 0:0.9.0-2.el5 Replaced: openib-mstflint.i386 0:1.0.1-5.el5 openib-mstflint.x86_64 0:1.0.1-5.el5 openib-perftest.i386 0:1.0.1-5.el5 openib-perftest.x86_64 0:1.0.1-5.el5 openib-tvflash.i386 0:0.9.1-5.el5 openib-tvflash.x86_64 0:0.9.1-5.el5 Then next run: Installed: openib-mstflint.i386 0:1.0.1-5.el5 openib-mstflint.x86_64 0:1.0.1-5.el5 openib-perftest.i386 0:1.0.1-5.el5 openib-perftest.x86_64 0:1.0.1-5.el5 openib-tvflash.i386 0:0.9.1-5.el5 openib-tvflash.x86_64 0:0.9.1-5.el5 Replaced: mstflint.i386 0:1.4-1.el5 mstflint.x86_64 0:1.4-1.el5 perftest.i386 0:1.2-14.el5 perftest.x86_64 0:1.2-14.el5 tvflash.i386 0:0.9.0-2.el5 tvflash.x86_64 0:0.9.0-2.el5 bug 511033, bug 510204, and bug 523135 appear to duplicate each other. oops. bug 510204 is different bug 524716 is also a dup *** Bug 524716 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** FYI, here are the list of packages in the repodata for the rhel-i386-client-workstation-5 channel: $ grep getPackage primary.xml | egrep '(mstflint|perftest|tvflash)' | sort <location href="getPackage/mstflint-1.3-1.el5.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/mstflint-1.4-1.el5.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/openib-mstflint-1.0.1-5.el5.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/openib-mstflint-1.2-6.el5_1.1.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/openib-mstflint-1.2-6.el5.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/openib-mstflint-1.3-1.el5_2.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/openib-perftest-1.0.1-5.el5.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/openib-perftest-1.2-11.el5_2.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/openib-perftest-1.2-6.el5_1.1.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/openib-perftest-1.2-6.el5.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/openib-tvflash-0.9.1-5.el5.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/openib-tvflash-0.9.2-6.el5_1.1.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/openib-tvflash-0.9.2-6.el5.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/openib-tvflash-0.9.2-8.el5_2.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/perftest-1.2-10.el5.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/perftest-1.2-11.el5.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/perftest-1.2-14.el5.i386.rpm" /> <location href="getPackage/tvflash-0.9.0-2.el5.i386.rpm" /> Ok, built yum-3.2.22-26.el5 and tested: 3.2.29 = works 3.2.22-25.el5 = fails 3.2.22-26.el5 = works ...where works == no constant updating. Sorry, for not seeing this sooner Doug! No worries, glad it's straightened out ;-) Any estimate on when we can expect a new "yum" RPM that includes this fix to be released? Thanks. Philippe, yum-3.2.22-26.el5 is being tested as part of 5.5 now ... and I don't expect any problems. If it's a significant problem you can run: yum downgrade yum-3.2.19 ...although then you'll need to stop yum from updating until >= 3.2.22-26 is out. testing procedure: = pkgB = obsoletes pkgA = pkgA-1 = obsoletes pkgB = pkgA-2 = (no obsoletes) --- no pkg* on system : 'yum install pkgA' will install pkgB, 'yum install pkgB install pkgB' only pkgA-1 on system : yum upgrade => installs pkgB only pkgA-2 on system : yum upgrade => installs pkgB only pkgB on system : yum upgrade => nothing, yum install pkgA-1 => nothing, yum install pkgA-2 => also nothing with pkgB installed "yum upgrade" and "yum list obsoletes" does not list pkgA-1 (assuming pkgA-2 is also available). rhts test created /CoreOS/yum/Regression/bz523135-circular-obsoletes-in-mstflint http://cvs.devel.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/tests/yum/Regression/bz523135-circular-obsoletes-in-mstflint/ rhts run=https://rhts.redhat.com/cgi-bin/rhts/jobs.cgi?id=129803 --- I could also upgrade stable systems --- Verified with yum-3.2.22-26.el5 An advisory has been issued which should help the problem described in this bug report. This report is therefore being closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files, please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report if the solution does not work for you. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2010-0254.html |