Hide Forgot
Description of problem: The lvm2-cluster sub package (and probably others) have a require of >= version but do not work unless they are the exact same version. RPMs should be configured with sub packages requiring the exact version of the main package not >= because of this issue. If you install version x of lvm2 and install version x-1 of lvm2-cluster you will see that lvm2-cluster does not work correctly and you can't use lvm2 inside a cluster. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): all How reproducible: This is what I have from my support tech that has the issue. 1) built a cluster with 2.02.83-3.el6 installed 2) disabled test-svc 3) "yum update lvm2" which updated lvm2 and lvm2-libs 4) "service clvmd restart" It fails to start because it can't gain an exclusive lock: [root@student105 ~]# clusvcadm -e test-svc Local machine trying to enable service:test-svc...Failure [root@student105 ~]# rpm -qa | grep ^lvm2 | sort lvm2-2.02.98-9.el6_4.3.x86_64 lvm2-cluster-2.02.83-3.el6.x86_64 lvm2-libs-2.02.98-9.el6_4.3.x86_64 Mar 11 11:18:38 student105 rgmanager[10062]: [lvm] Failed to activate logical volume, Cluster/Test Mar 11 11:18:38 student105 rgmanager[10084]: [lvm] Attempting cleanup of Cluster/Test Mar 11 11:18:38 student105 rgmanager[10111]: [lvm] Failed second attempt to activate Cluster/Test Mar 11 11:18:38 student105 rgmanager[1338]: start on lvm "testha" returned 1 (generic error) Mar 11 11:18:38 student105 rgmanager[1338]: #68: Failed to start service:test-svc; return value: 1 If we upgrade lvm2-cluster and restart clvmd that will fix the problem. I have left it in the broken state for you. Note this is an HA-LVM configuration. This would never happen if the sub package required the same version as the main package.
We'll think about how to deal with this and whether or not we do still need to allow people to combine different versions. (Normally they are compatible.) Any fix would apply from RHEL6.6 and RHEL7.1 onwards.
(In reply to Alasdair Kergon from comment #2) > We'll think about how to deal with this and whether or not we do still need > to allow people to combine different versions. (Normally they are > compatible.) > Any fix would apply from RHEL6.6 and RHEL7.1 onwards. I'd probably go with a firm dependency on exact version. What is the disadvantage? The only one I see at the moment is that clvmd is restarted on package upgrade. But that should be working...
Hard dependencies are being enforced. As tested in Bug #1089229 (dependencies with device-mapper). root@virt-122 ~]# yum update lvm2-2.02.107-2.el6.x86_64.rpm Loaded plugins: product-id, security, subscription-manager Setting up Update Process Examining lvm2-2.02.107-2.el6.x86_64.rpm: lvm2-2.02.107-2.el6.x86_64 Marking lvm2-2.02.107-2.el6.x86_64.rpm as an update to lvm2-2.02.107-1.el6.x86_64 Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package lvm2.x86_64 0:2.02.107-1.el6 will be updated --> Processing Dependency: lvm2 = 2.02.107-1.el6 for package: lvm2-cluster-2.02.107-1.el6.x86_64 ---> Package lvm2.x86_64 0:2.02.107-2.el6 will be an update --> Processing Dependency: lvm2-libs = 2.02.107-2.el6 for package: lvm2-2.02.107-2.el6.x86_64 --> Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Package: lvm2-cluster-2.02.107-1.el6.x86_64 (@beaker-ResilientStorage/6.6) Requires: lvm2 = 2.02.107-1.el6 Removing: lvm2-2.02.107-1.el6.x86_64 (@anaconda-RedHatEnterpriseLinux-201407102225.x86_64/6.6) lvm2 = 2.02.107-1.el6 Updated By: lvm2-2.02.107-2.el6.x86_64 (/lvm2-2.02.107-2.el6.x86_64) lvm2 = 2.02.107-2.el6 Error: Package: lvm2-2.02.107-2.el6.x86_64 (/lvm2-2.02.107-2.el6.x86_64) Requires: lvm2-libs = 2.02.107-2.el6 Installed: lvm2-libs-2.02.107-1.el6.x86_64 (@anaconda-RedHatEnterpriseLinux-201407102225.x86_64/6.6) lvm2-libs = 2.02.107-1.el6 You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest Marking VERIFIED with lvm2-2.02.107-2.el6 BUILT: Fri Jul 11 15:47:33 CEST 2014 lvm2-libs-2.02.107-2.el6 BUILT: Fri Jul 11 15:47:33 CEST 2014 lvm2-cluster-2.02.107-2.el6 BUILT: Fri Jul 11 15:47:33 CEST 2014
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2014-1387.html