Bug 134497 – rpm obsoletes not functioning

Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0 on a still to be determined date in the near future. The original upgrade date has been delayed.

Bug 134497 - rpm obsoletes not functioning

Summary:	rpm obsoletes not functioning

Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE

Aliases:	None

Product:	Fedora
Classification:	Fedora
Component:	rpm (Show other bugs)
Sub Component:
Version:	2
Hardware:	All Linux

Priority	medium Severity medium
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Assigned To:	Paul Nasrat
QA Contact:	Mike McLean
Docs Contact:

URL:	http://linux.duke.edu/~skvidal/broken/
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Depends On:
Blocks:
	Show dependency tree / graph

Reported:	2004-10-03 22:55 EDT by Seth Vidal
Modified:	2007-11-30 17:10 EST (History)
CC List:	4 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:	2005-04-19 14:47:10 EDT
Type:	---
Regression:	---
Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---

Attachments	(Terms of Use)
working obsoletes rpm -Uvvh output from rhl9 (5.92 KB, text/plain) 2004-10-04 10:40 EDT, Seth Vidal	no flags	Details
broken obsolete rpm -Uvvh output from fc2 (5.19 KB, text/plain) 2004-10-04 10:41 EDT, Seth Vidal	no flags	Details
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Groups: None (edit)

Description Seth Vidal 2004-10-03 22:55:36 EDT

Description of problem:
rpm is not obsoleting packages.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
rpm-4.3.1-0.3

How reproducible:
every time.



Steps to Reproduce:
1. Download i686 rpms from http://linux.duke.edu/~skvidal/broken/
2. rpm -ivh baz-0.1-1.i686.rpm
3. rpm -q baz
4. rpm -qp --obsoletes quux-0.1-1.i686.rpm
5. you'll note it obsoletes baz >= 0.1
6. rpm -Uvh quux-0.1-1.i686.rpm
7. rpm -q quux - it's installed
8. rpm -q baz - it's still installed too!

Actual results:
baz is still installed

Expected results:
baz should have been removed.


Additional info:
This gets EXTRA special wacky when you start dealing with biarch since
obsoletes do not specify arch. Also consider i686 being obsoleted by
noarch.

Comment 1 Seth Vidal 2004-10-04 01:33:03 EDT

with these packages it appears to occur on fc1 and el3u3

Comment 2 Seth Vidal 2004-10-04 10:33:37 EDT

just tested on rhl9 - everything works there.

Comment 3 Seth Vidal 2004-10-04 10:40:21 EDT

Created attachment 104715 [details]
working obsoletes rpm -Uvvh output from rhl9

Comment 4 Seth Vidal 2004-10-04 10:41:30 EDT

Created attachment 104716 [details]
broken obsolete rpm -Uvvh output from fc2

Comment 5 Seth Vidal 2004-10-04 10:57:10 EDT

looks like if the version of the obsoleting package is not <= then it
will work correctly.

but if obspackage-evr is <=  installedpackage-evr then it won't remove
the other.

Comment 6 Paul Nasrat 2004-10-04 11:00:24 EDT

Relevant diff between RHL9 to HEAD, reversed on HEAD

--- depends.c   2003-03-03 22:12:00.000000000 +0000
+++ /export/anu/home/pauln/src/rpm/lib/depends.c        2004-04-01
13:56:54.000000000 +0100
@@ -305,7 +305,8 @@
             */
            if (rpmdsEVR(obsoletes) == NULL
             || rpmdsAnyMatchesDep(oh, obsoletes, _rpmds_nopromote))
-               xx = removePackage(ts, oh, rpmdbGetIteratorOffset(mi),
pkgKey);
+               if (rpmVersionCompare(h, oh))
+                   xx = removePackage(ts, oh,
rpmdbGetIteratorOffset(mi), pkgKey);
        }
        mi = rpmdbFreeIterator(mi);
     }

Comment 7 Jeff Johnson 2004-10-04 14:00:50 EDT

The added line prevents obsoleting package with identical NEVR.

This was important bug fix for major customer (I can tell from
when the fix went in), but for the life of me, I cannot remember the
problem report. Perhaps relocated packages, perhaps multilib.

Comment 8 Seth Vidal 2004-10-04 14:02:31 EDT

it also prevents obsoleting package identical EVR, not just NEVR

Comment 9 Jeff Johnson 2004-10-05 17:08:16 EDT

Fixed (by reverting the 1 line change) in rpm-4.3.2-9.

Comment 10 David Lehman 2004-12-02 18:07:26 EST

Can we get this fixed in RHEL-3 branch as well, please?

Comment 13 Jeremy Katz 2005-04-19 14:47:10 EDT

Closing due to inactivity.  If this issue still occurs with current releases,
please reopen and set the release in which you've encountered the problem.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.