Bug 748743

Summary: Package: libvirt-lock-sanlock-0.9.4-17.el6.x86_64 (rhel-x86_64-server-optional-6-htb), Requires: libvirt = 0.9.4-17.el6
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Reporter: Yaniv Kaul <ykaul>
Component: libvirtAssignee: Laine Stump <laine>
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact: Virtualization Bugs <virt-bugs>
Severity: urgent Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 6.2CC: acathrow, ajia, berrange, dallan, jkt, mzhan, nzhang, rwu, weizhan, whuang
Target Milestone: rcKeywords: Reopened
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-10-25 13:55:00 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:

Description Yaniv Kaul 2011-10-25 08:48:15 UTC 
Description of problem:
Apparently, the RPM dependency of the package is "=", should probably be >= 

[root@master-vds9 yum.repos.d]# yum deplist libvirt-lock-sanlock-0.9.4-17.el6.x86_64 |grep libvirt
package: libvirt-lock-sanlock.x86_64 0.9.4-17.el6
  dependency: config(libvirt-lock-sanlock) = 0.9.4-17.el6
   provider: libvirt-lock-sanlock.x86_64 0.9.4-17.el6
  dependency: libvirt = 0.9.4-17.el6

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
libvirt-lock-sanlock-0.9.4-17.el6.x86_64

How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
  
Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:
Comment 1 Daniel Berrangé 2011-10-25 09:33:54 UTC 
> Apparently, the RPM dependency of the package is "=", should probably be >= 

No, that is intentional. Any libvirt plugins *must* come from exactly the same build.

The brew build has all necessary packages:

http://download.devel.redhat.com/brewroot/packages/libvirt/0.9.4/17.el6/x86_64/

So this dependency problem is either caused by a mis-configured local yum install, or by pointing at a yum repository which has been misbuilt & is missing RPMs.
Comment 2 Dave Allan 2011-10-25 13:39:28 UTC 
It clearly is a bug with *something* since Yaniv is pointing to an official repo.  Reopening so we can figure out where the problem is and get it resolved by someone.
Comment 3 Daniel Berrangé 2011-10-25 13:55:00 UTC 
No, as suggested above, it was a local yum repo mis-configuration. RHEL has 2 separate channels (the base & optional) and only the base was configured, hence there was no repo for updating the sanlock plugin