Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
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 1246425

Summary: PackageKit conflict files for 32b/64b versions
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Reporter: Tomas Pelka <tpelka>
Component: relengAssignee: Lubomír Sedlář <lsedlar>
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX QA Contact: Release Test Team <release-test-team-automation>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 7.2CC: akatarki, atodorov, bnater, jcastran, jfrancin, jomurphy, kwalker, malevine, rhughes, tpelka, yanpliu
Target Milestone: rcKeywords: Reopened, TestBlocker
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-11-11 21:48:56 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 Tomas Pelka 2015-07-24 09:59:09 UTC
Description of problem:
conflict between 32b and 64b version of PK

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install both versions (32b and 64b) of PK
2.
3.

Actual results:
 file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/packagekit/__init__.pyc conflicts between attempted installs of PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc and PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc64
  file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/packagekit/__init__.pyo conflicts between attempted installs of PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc and PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc64
  file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/packagekit/backend.pyc conflicts between attempted installs of PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc and PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc64
  file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/packagekit/backend.pyo conflicts between attempted installs of PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc and PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc64
  file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/packagekit/enums.pyc conflicts between attempted installs of PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc and PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc64
  file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/packagekit/enums.pyo conflicts between attempted installs of PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc and PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc64
  file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/packagekit/filter.pyc conflicts between attempted installs of PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc and PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc64
  file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/packagekit/filter.pyo conflicts between attempted installs of PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc and PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc64
  file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/packagekit/misc.pyc conflicts between attempted installs of PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc and PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc64
  file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/packagekit/misc.pyo conflicts between attempted installs of PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc and PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc64
  file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/packagekit/package.pyc conflicts between attempted installs of PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc and PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc64
  file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/packagekit/package.pyo conflicts between attempted installs of PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc and PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc64
  file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/packagekit/progress.pyc conflicts between attempted installs of PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc and PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc64
  file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/packagekit/progress.pyo conflicts between attempted installs of PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc and PackageKit-1.0.7-2.el7.ppc64


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 1 Tomas Pelka 2015-07-24 10:00:22 UTC
Please correct me if I'm wrong but both 32b and 64b should be installable on 64b systems.

Comment 2 Tomas Pelka 2015-07-24 10:01:27 UTC
Richard could you please take a look?

Thanks
-Tom

Comment 3 Richard Hughes 2015-07-24 13:16:12 UTC
(In reply to Tomas Pelka from comment #2)
> Richard could you please take a look?

You're not supposed to be able to install both architectures of the daemon. You can do this for the library, e.g. you should be able to install PackageKit-glib.i386 and PackageKit-glib.x64 at the some time. Is the build tool somehow thinking that the daemon should be multilib?

Comment 4 Tomas Pelka 2015-07-24 17:53:42 UTC
(In reply to Richard Hughes from comment #3)
> (In reply to Tomas Pelka from comment #2)
> > Richard could you please take a look?
> 
> You're not supposed to be able to install both architectures of the daemon.
> You can do this for the library, e.g. you should be able to install
> PackageKit-glib.i386 and PackageKit-glib.x64 at the some time. Is the build
> tool somehow thinking that the daemon should be multilib?

As all mentioned files are part of PackageKit rpm I don't think PackageKit-glib have this issue too.

The problem is that PackageKit is multilib, and both x86_64 and i386 version will be available in repo so customers will be able to install it. I believe noarch subpackage with python files in /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/packagekit/ will most probably solve this issue. What do you think?

Thanks
-Tom

Comment 5 Richard Hughes 2015-07-27 09:04:30 UTC
(In reply to Tomas Pelka from comment #4)
> The problem is that PackageKit is multilib

Why? PackageKit-glib should be multilib, not the main package. PackageKit contains the /usr/bin/pkcon binary (among others) which makes no sense to install in 32 bit and 64 bit versions.

Comment 6 Tomas Pelka 2015-07-27 09:44:28 UTC
OK I can see the problem is not on PK site but on ET site.

Sorry for false alarm.

Comment 7 Tomas Pelka 2015-11-25 09:37:15 UTC
Maybe I was wrong with previous statement. The problem for me was related to python which should be noarch it self. I think PK should not be multilib.

Comment 10 Richard Hughes 2017-10-09 13:48:46 UTC
The PackageKit package (the daemon) should not be marked multilib. The PackageKit-glib (library) is multilib, and you can install 32 and 64 bit builds without any conflicts. This is still not a PackageKit bug...

Comment 11 Alexander Todorov 2018-08-30 09:54:44 UTC
*** Bug 1391501 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 20 Chris Williams 2020-11-11 21:48:56 UTC
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 shipped it's final minor release on September 29th, 2020. 7.9 was the last minor releases scheduled for RHEL 7.
From intial triage it does not appear the remaining Bugzillas meet the inclusion criteria for Maintenance Phase 2 and will now be closed. 

From the RHEL life cycle page:
https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata#Maintenance_Support_2_Phase
"During Maintenance Support 2 Phase for Red Hat Enterprise Linux version 7,Red Hat defined Critical and Important impact Security Advisories (RHSAs) and selected (at Red Hat discretion) Urgent Priority Bug Fix Advisories (RHBAs) may be released as they become available."

If this BZ was closed in error and meets the above criteria please re-open it flag for 7.9.z, provide suitable business and technical justifications, and follow the process for Accelerated Fixes:
https://source.redhat.com/groups/public/pnt-cxno/pnt_customer_experience_and_operations_wiki/support_delivery_accelerated_fix_release_handbook  

Feature Requests can re-opened and moved to RHEL 8 if the desired functionality is not already present in the product. 

Please reach out to the applicable Product Experience Engineer[0] if you have any questions or concerns.  

[0] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/page.cgi?id=agile_component_mapping.html&product=Red+Hat+Enterprise+Linux+7