Please fix this ASAP, because keepassx 2.0.0 create databases which cannot be read by keepassx 0.4.4 which is an upgrade (WTF?!) in Fedora 24. # dnf update Last metadata expiration check: 0:09:03 ago on Sat May 21 11:29:05 2016. --> Starting dependency resolution ---> Package keepassx.x86_64 2.0.0-1.fc23 will be upgraded ---> Package keepassx.x86_64 1:0.4.4-1.fc24 will be an upgrade --> Finished dependency resolution Dependencies resolved. ================================================================================ Package Arch Version Repository Size ================================================================================ Upgrading: keepassx x86_64 1:0.4.4-1.fc24 fedora 797 k Transaction Summary ================================================================================ Upgrade 1 Package Total download size: 797 k Is this ok [y/N]: Consider this a show stopper bug for Fedora 24. I wonder how on Earth such bugs slip in.
Discussed during the 2016-05-23 blocker review meeting: [1] This bug has been classified as a RejectedBlocker and an AcceptedFreezeException as it is not in the release-blocking package sets in the blocker criteria, however there is a benefit to pushing this stable between the freeze date and 0-day update-push-day. See [2] for more info. [1] https://meetbot-raw.fedoraproject.org/fedora-blocker-review/2016-05-23/f24-blocker-review.2016-05-23-16.00.txt [2] https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1569
keepassx 2 on F23 (and F24 for a while) was a big mistake. The bug should be to downgrade keepassx to 0.4.4 on F23 instead.
(In reply to Jan Synacek from comment #2) What about all those Fedora 23 users who cannot downgrade because KeePassX 2.0 has a DB which is incompatible with version 0.4.4? Not to mention that this DB cannot be exported and imported. In short what you're saying is that we're all f*cked without explaining what's wrong with a newer version.
(In reply to Artem S. Tashkinov from comment #3) > What about all those Fedora 23 users who cannot downgrade because KeePassX > 2.0 has a DB which is incompatible with version 0.4.4? Not to mention that > this DB cannot be exported and imported. Apparently the import into 2.0.0 creates a backup of the v1 DB file, which could still be used. Also there is a fatal bug in 2.0.0 that is fixed in 2.0.1, so using 2.0.0 in F24 seems foolish. See https://www.keepassx.org/dev/issues/392
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4) It's foolish to force a new untested buggy version on Fedora users and then ... blame them for using it. It reeks of humiliation, arrogance and schadenfreude. Update keepassx to 2.0.2 (v2.0.1 is also buggy) in both Fedora 23 and 24 and stop f*cking around.
Proposed as a Freeze Exception for 24-final by Fedora user amluto using the blocker tracking app because: Without a fix for bug 1338054, KeePassX databases created on an up-to-date Fedora 23 system cannot be read on Fedora 24. I propose that the following updates be allowed as freeze exceptions: FEDORA-2016-78dd6d9bb7 - keepassx-2.0.2-1.fc24 (update keepassx on f24 so it is new enough to read databases created by f23's version) FEDORA-2016-f1da178e94 - keepassx0-0.4.4-3.fc24 (allow users who want to stay on the 0.x series to do so) Neither of these should have any effect on anything release-critical and therefore shouldn't impose any significant testing burden beyond simply testing the updates themselves.
Shouldn't keepassx.fc24 provide /usr/bin/keepassx, though? A symlink or an alternative would work. IMO a symlink is more straightforward, since all the 2.0.0 users on fc23 expect it to live at /usr/bin/keepassx.
See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1340269 keepassx is going to 2.0.2 with a keepassx2 binary, and keepassx0 will provide keepassx at 0.4.4.
keepassx0-0.4.4-3.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-f1da178e94
keepassx-2.0.2-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-78dd6d9bb7
(In reply to Jon Ciesla from comment #8) > See: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1340269 > > keepassx is going to 2.0.2 with a keepassx2 binary, and keepassx0 will > provide keepassx at 0.4.4. This isn't correct. keepassx2, as you submitted it, provides a '/usr/bin/keepassx2' binary. keepassx0, as you submitted it, provides a '/usr/bin/keepassx0' binary. Nothing provides /usr/bin/keepassx. For keepassx0, see: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=7760707 If the fc23 mistake hadn't happened, then I think that having keepassx2 mean v2 and keepassx mean v0 would make sense. But the mistake did happen, and I think that keepassx should run keepassx2.
Please don't mess up the keepassx landscape in Fedora any further. Updating keepassx to the "2 series" in F23 was a violation of packaging guidelines but happened. So, "/usr/bin/keepassx" being the series 2 binary is a matter of fact in the latest released Fedora. Doing anything in F24 to revert that just adds more nuisances for keepassx users. Whoever didn't follow the move to series 2 has an "excludes" in their dnf config since then. Whoever made the move would be screwed by a F24 keepassx that is not what the F23 keepassx is, or newer.
To clarify, I'm doing what FESCO opted for. This will be the result: keepassx - 2.0.2 in Fedora(keepassx2), 0.4.4 in EPEL(keepassx). keepassx0 - 0.x in Fedora(keepassx), not in EPEL. keepassx2 - not in Fedora, 2.0.2 in EPEL(keepassx2). We have Obsoletes in place that anyone with 0.4.4 should stay there.
So F24 keepassx upgrades F23 keepassx (both 2 series) but provides the binary under a different name???
Yes. They needed to be parallel installable, and the buildsystems don't make that elegant.
(In reply to Jon Ciesla from comment #15) > Yes. They needed to be parallel installable, and the buildsystems don't > make that elegant. A simple "ln -s keepassx2 %{_bindir}/keepassx" should do the trick, no?
So, the question is what version should have the /usr/bin/keepassx name (if any). Right now, it's nothing, which seems... odd. Either the old one should keep that name (but then people won't be migrated until keepassx0 is dropped) or keepassx2 should have it (and people will migrate to the new one).
Well, the migration has happended on F23 already. Do we want to revert that? I hope not. /usr/bin/keepassx is the 2 series version there (keepassx the package name).
*** Bug 1336147 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 1343056 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 1328804 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 1343064 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
keepassx-2.0.2-2.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-1431671b34
keepassx-2.0.2-2.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-645a4b89a9
keepassx-2.0.2-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-645a4b89a9
keepassx-2.0.2-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-1431671b34
The updates together seem to achieve the desired result.
Both keepassx-2.0.2-2.fc23 and keepassx0-0.4.4-3.fc23 have identical %description text, including: KeePassX uses a database format that is compatible with KeePass Password Safe for MS Windows. but no mention that the database format is not compatible between the two. That seems like useful info to put in the %description, maybe something like: KeePassX uses a database format that is compatible with KeePass Password Safe v2 for MS Windows. KeePassX 0.4.x uses a database format that is compatible with KeePass Password Safe v1 for MS Windows. c.f. https://www.keepassx.org/faq/#q_2 c.f. http://keepass.info/help/v2/version.html
Good catch, thanks!
keepassx0-0.4.4-4.fc23 keepassx-2.0.2-3.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-df0dfd42ce
keepassx0-0.4.4-4.fc24 keepassx-2.0.2-3.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-3e6587e16d
keepassx-2.0.2-3.fc24, keepassx0-0.4.4-4.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-3e6587e16d
keepassx-2.0.2-3.fc23, keepassx0-0.4.4-4.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-df0dfd42ce
keepassx-2.0.2-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
keepassx0-0.4.4-3.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
keepassx-2.0.2-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
keepassx-2.0.2-3.fc24, keepassx0-0.4.4-4.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
keepassx-2.0.2-3.fc23, keepassx0-0.4.4-4.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.