RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Bug 1182337 - nss-softokn updates should require the same nss-softokn-freebl
Summary: nss-softokn updates should require the same nss-softokn-freebl
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 1183448
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Classification: Red Hat
Component: nss-softokn
Version: 6.6
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Elio Maldonado Batiz
QA Contact: BaseOS QE Security Team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2015-01-14 21:48 UTC by Johnny Hughes
Modified: 2019-03-22 07:33 UTC (History)
16 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-02-11 18:27:18 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Johnny Hughes 2015-01-14 21:48:18 UTC 
Description of problem:
Based on issues with several CentOS user updates:

nss-softokn updates should require nss-softokn-freebl of the same version to be updated as well.

People were able to update nss-softokn (yum update nss-softokn) without upgrading nss-softokn-freebl .. The update completes fine, but with an older nss-softokn-freebl.

These mismatched versions caused major issues and renders yum and rpm unusable.

You can either upgrade to a newer version of nss-softokn and do not upgrade nss-softokn-freebl .. or downgrade nss-softokn-freebl and see the results.

yum and rpm will happily install an older nss-softokn-freebl.
Comment 2 David van de Meer 2015-01-15 06:57:33 UTC 
Any update on this? How do you restore yum and rpm? I have mismatched version and have no way of getting the versions matched as yum and rpm are both broken
Comment 3 Anssi Johansson 2015-01-15 08:08:07 UTC 
David, Bugzilla is not a support venue. If you are a Red Hat customer, consider opening a support case with them. If you are using CentOS, see https://www.centos.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=214791&f=13#p214791 for one possible workaround. Let's continue this discussion on the forum if the workaround does not work for you.
Comment 5 john.baldwin 2015-01-16 15:05:53 UTC 
David I did the steps prescribed in the Anssi Johnson post and corrected my issue on my Red hat 6.6 64bit server.  
1) wget the nss-softokn-freebl-3.14.3-19.el6_6.x86_64.rpm from a Centos 6.6 update mirror
2)rpm2cpio nss-softokn-freebl-3.14.3-19.el6_6.x86_64.rpm | cpio -idmv  (to install cause yum and rpm not functioning because of this bug)
3) cp ./lib64/libfreeblpriv3.* /lib64

Before that I was getting "error: rpmdbNextIterator: skipping h#     255 Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID fd431d51: BAD" when doing a rpm -qa command.  No rpm rebuild worked.  Those 3 steps fixed it.
Comment 6 john.baldwin 2015-01-16 16:12:31 UTC 
(In reply to john.baldwin from comment #5)
> David I did the steps prescribed in the Anssi Johnson post and corrected my
> issue on my Red hat 6.6 64bit server.  
> 1) wget the nss-softokn-freebl-3.14.3-19.el6_6.x86_64.rpm from a Centos 6.6
> update mirror
> 2)rpm2cpio nss-softokn-freebl-3.14.3-19.el6_6.x86_64.rpm | cpio -idmv  (to
> install cause yum and rpm not functioning because of this bug)
> 3) cp ./lib64/libfreeblpriv3.* /lib64
> 
> Before that I was getting "error: rpmdbNextIterator: skipping h#     255
> Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID fd431d51: BAD" when doing a rpm -qa
> command.  No rpm rebuild worked.  Those 3 steps fixed it.

Understand cd /  before doing step 2
Comment 7 Elio Maldonado Batiz 2015-01-19 22:30:31 UTC 
I believe this bug is a duplicate of Bug 1183448 and that one was cloned from Bug 1182662 which has the analysis.
Comment 8 manuel wolfshant 2015-01-20 14:19:45 UTC 
both bugs mentioned in comment #7 are restricted
Comment 9 W. Rex Hardin 2015-01-26 19:30:01 UTC 
Is there an ETA for the fix? Definitely hit this trying to yum install 389-ds on CentOS 6.5.
Comment 10 Elio Maldonado Batiz 2015-01-26 21:34:17 UTC 
Two weeks or sooner is my guess.
Comment 11 Marcel Kolaja 2015-01-30 10:50:00 UTC 
This bug should be resolved in RHEL 6.6.z within bug #1183448 and will be resolved in RHEL 6.7 within bug #1182662. Am I getting it right Elio? Thanks!
Comment 12 Elio Maldonado Batiz 2015-02-01 19:03:10 UTC 
Marcel, you got it right. It has been solved on RHEL-6.6.z as an advisory for nss-softokn with two bugs fixes, one of which is for bug #1183448, went live last week. CentOS 6.6 has picked up the fix already.
Comment 13 Marcel Kolaja 2015-02-11 17:37:07 UTC 
(In reply to Elio Maldonado Batiz from comment #12)
> Marcel, you got it right. It has been solved on RHEL-6.6.z as an advisory
> for nss-softokn with two bugs fixes, one of which is for bug #1183448, went
> live last week. CentOS 6.6 has picked up the fix already.

Should this one be closed then?
Comment 14 Elio Maldonado Batiz 2015-02-11 18:27:18 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1183448 ***
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.