Bug 884648

Summary:	rpm incorrectly says "Failed dependencies"
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Jan Synacek <jsynacek>
Component:	rpm	Assignee:	Panu Matilainen <pmatilai>
Status:	CLOSED DEFERRED	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	19	CC:	akozumpl, ffesti, jnovy, jzeleny, pknirsch, pmatilai
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2013-05-20 10:47:37 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 Jan Synacek 2012-12-06 13:44:07 UTC

Description of problem:
# rpm -qa | grep -i iptables
iptables-1.4.16.2-4.fc19.x86_64
iptables-1.4.16.2-5.fc19.x86_64
iptables-services-1.4.16.2-4.fc19.x86_64

# rpm -Uvh iptables-services-1.4.16.2-5.fc19.x86_64.rpm
error: Failed dependencies:
	iptables = 1.4.16.2-5.fc19 is needed by iptables-services-1.4.16.2-5.fc19.x86_64

Note that the correct version of iptables is there, so the dependencies are met.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
rpm-4.10.90-0.git11989.3.fc19.x86_64


How reproducible:
Given the state of the rpmdb as described above, always.


Steps to Reproduce:
1. See description
2.
3.
  
Actual results:
rpm aborts with "error: Failed dependencies".


Expected results:
rpm correctly updates the package.


Additional info:

Comment 1 Panu Matilainen 2012-12-07 08:51:21 UTC

Having two versions of a regular package installed typically indicates a previous transaction aborted abnormally (ie killed in mid-flight), in which case its possible the indexes are in inconsistent state. I'm not able to reproduce that with an artificial testcase of a similar situation but a potential difference is there's no aborted transaction involved in my test.

Does it start working if you do 'rpmdb --rebuilddb' first?

Comment 2 Jan Synacek 2012-12-07 09:00:08 UTC

# rpmdb --rebuilddb

# rpm -qa | grep -i iptables
iptables-1.4.16.2-4.fc19.x86_64
iptables-1.4.16.2-5.fc19.x86_64
iptables-services-1.4.16.2-4.fc19.x86_64

# rpm -Uvh --test iptables-services-1.4.16.2-5.fc19.x86_64.rpm
Preparing...                        ################################# [100%]

Seems to be working now. I guess I won't be able to reproduce this anymore after rebuilding the database. Or.. any ideas?

Comment 3 Panu Matilainen 2012-12-07 09:32:43 UTC

So it was a case of inconsistent indexes, missing/bad data causing misbehaviors is not a big surprise and no need for further reproducing the problem then.

The actual bug is that such conditions are not automatically detected and handled. The issue is as old as rpm itself and while addressing it needs to happen eventually, its out of scope here.

Comment 4 Fedora End Of Life 2013-04-03 19:39:23 UTC

This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 19 development cycle.
Changing version to '19'.

(As we did not run this process for some time, it could affect also pre-Fedora 19 development
cycle bugs. We are very sorry. It will help us with cleanup during Fedora 19 End Of Life. Thank you.)

More information and reason for this action is here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora19

Comment 5 Panu Matilainen 2013-05-20 10:47:37 UTC

DEFERRED, as per comment #3:

The actual bug is that such conditions are not automatically detected and handled. The issue is as old as rpm itself and while addressing it needs to happen eventually, its out of scope here.