Description of problem: After this update [1] multiple people report problems with rdma-core.i686 installed on their x86_64 system: $ sudo dnf update rdma-core Last metadata expiration check: 0:22:29 ago on Mon 25 Jan 2021 10:45:34 AM CET. Dependencies resolved. Problem: cannot install both rdma-core-33.0-1.fc33.x86_64 and rdma-core-32.0-1.fc33.x86_64 - rdma-core-32.0-1.fc33.i686 has inferior architecture - cannot install the best update candidate for package rdma-core-32.0-1.fc33.x86_64 - problem with installed package rdma-core-32.0-1.fc33.i686 ================================================================================ Package Architecture Version Repository Size ================================================================================ Skipping packages with conflicts: (add '--best --allowerasing' to command line to force their upgrade): rdma-core x86_64 33.0-1.fc33 updates 56 k The i686 package is missing from the repo: $ sudo dnf list --showduplicates rdma-core Last metadata expiration check: 0:22:13 ago on Mon 25 Jan 2021 10:45:34 AM CET. Installed Packages rdma-core.i686 32.0-1.fc33 @updates rdma-core.x86_64 32.0-1.fc33 @updates Available Packages rdma-core.i686 31.0-1.fc33 fedora rdma-core.x86_64 31.0-1.fc33 fedora rdma-core.x86_64 33.0-1.fc33 updates I don't understand why this was intentionally pushed even though the problem was reported in Bodhi in advance. I suppose this could be related to bug 1901086. It could also be an infra failure. But my first impression is that the multilib detection changed after package deps were adjusted. Please look into this ASAP, this breaks system update for many users, thanks. [1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-939be780dc Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): rdma-core-33.0-1.fc33
Issue had be fixed in rdma-core-33.0-2.fc34 build. tmp]$ cat /etc/redhat-release Fedora release 34 (Rawhide) tmp]$ rpm -q rdma-core rdma-core-33.0-2.fc34.x86_64 rdma-core-33.0-2.fc34.i686
Great. But it needs to be submitted to Fedora 32 and Fedora 33 as updates, because currently Fedora 33 is broken and Fedora 32 has the broken build pending as an update in updates-testing. Thanks.
[honli@localhost ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three) [honli@localhost ~]$ wget -q https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/rdma-core/33.0/1.fc33/i686/rdma-core-33.0-1.fc33.i686.rpm [honli@localhost ~]$ sudo dnf install ./rdma-core-33.0-1.fc33.i686.rpm Last metadata expiration check: 0:18:25 ago on Tue 26 Jan 2021 05:41:11 AM EST. Dependencies resolved. ========================================================================================== Package Architecture Version Repository Size ========================================================================================== Installing: rdma-core i686 33.0-1.fc33 @commandline 57 k Installing dependencies: glibc i686 2.32-3.fc33 updates 3.4 M libgcc i686 10.2.1-9.fc33 updates 108 k libgcrypt i686 1.8.7-1.fc33 updates 442 k libgpg-error i686 1.41-1.fc33 updates 217 k libnl3 i686 3.5.0-5.fc33 fedora 343 k libzstd i686 1.4.7-1.fc33 updates 331 k lz4-libs i686 1.9.1-3.fc33 fedora 62 k systemd-libs i686 246.7-2.fc33 updates 617 k xz-libs i686 5.2.5-4.fc33 updates 99 k Transaction Summary ========================================================================================== Install 10 Packages Total size: 5.6 M Installed size: 21 M Is this ok [y/N]: y Downloading Packages: [SKIPPED] glibc-2.32-3.fc33.i686.rpm: Already downloaded [SKIPPED] libgcc-10.2.1-9.fc33.i686.rpm: Already downloaded [SKIPPED] libgcrypt-1.8.7-1.fc33.i686.rpm: Already downloaded [SKIPPED] libgpg-error-1.41-1.fc33.i686.rpm: Already downloaded [SKIPPED] libzstd-1.4.7-1.fc33.i686.rpm: Already downloaded [SKIPPED] systemd-libs-246.7-2.fc33.i686.rpm: Already downloaded [SKIPPED] xz-libs-5.2.5-4.fc33.i686.rpm: Already downloaded [SKIPPED] libnl3-3.5.0-5.fc33.i686.rpm: Already downloaded [SKIPPED] lz4-libs-1.9.1-3.fc33.i686.rpm: Already downloaded Running transaction check Transaction check succeeded. Running transaction test Transaction test succeeded. Running transaction Preparing : 1/1 Installing : libgcc-10.2.1-9.fc33.i686 1/10 Running scriptlet: libgcc-10.2.1-9.fc33.i686 1/10 Running scriptlet: glibc-2.32-3.fc33.i686 2/10 Installing : glibc-2.32-3.fc33.i686 2/10 Running scriptlet: glibc-2.32-3.fc33.i686 2/10 Installing : libgpg-error-1.41-1.fc33.i686 3/10 Installing : libgcrypt-1.8.7-1.fc33.i686 4/10 Installing : libzstd-1.4.7-1.fc33.i686 5/10 Installing : xz-libs-5.2.5-4.fc33.i686 6/10 Installing : libnl3-3.5.0-5.fc33.i686 7/10 Installing : lz4-libs-1.9.1-3.fc33.i686 8/10 Installing : systemd-libs-246.7-2.fc33.i686 9/10 Running scriptlet: systemd-libs-246.7-2.fc33.i686 9/10 Installing : rdma-core-33.0-1.fc33.i686 10/10 Running scriptlet: rdma-core-33.0-1.fc33.i686 10/10 Verifying : glibc-2.32-3.fc33.i686 1/10 Verifying : libgcc-10.2.1-9.fc33.i686 2/10 Verifying : libgcrypt-1.8.7-1.fc33.i686 3/10 Verifying : libgpg-error-1.41-1.fc33.i686 4/10 Verifying : libzstd-1.4.7-1.fc33.i686 5/10 Verifying : systemd-libs-246.7-2.fc33.i686 6/10 Verifying : xz-libs-5.2.5-4.fc33.i686 7/10 Verifying : libnl3-3.5.0-5.fc33.i686 8/10 Verifying : lz4-libs-1.9.1-3.fc33.i686 9/10 Verifying : rdma-core-33.0-1.fc33.i686 10/10 Installed: glibc-2.32-3.fc33.i686 libgcc-10.2.1-9.fc33.i686 libgcrypt-1.8.7-1.fc33.i686 libgpg-error-1.41-1.fc33.i686 libnl3-3.5.0-5.fc33.i686 libzstd-1.4.7-1.fc33.i686 lz4-libs-1.9.1-3.fc33.i686 rdma-core-33.0-1.fc33.i686 systemd-libs-246.7-2.fc33.i686 xz-libs-5.2.5-4.fc33.i686 Complete!
dnf remove rdma-core Dependencies resolved. ============================================================================================================================================== Package Architecture Version Repository Size ============================================================================================================================================== Removing: rdma-core i686 32.0-1.fc33 @updates 115 k rdma-core x86_64 32.0-1.fc33 @updates 121 k Transaction Summary ============================================================================================================================================== Remove 2 Packages Freed space: 236 k Is this ok [y/N]: y Running transaction check Transaction check succeeded. Running transaction test Transaction test succeeded. snapper: creating pre_snapshot failed: error.unknown_config: org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.Failed Running transaction Preparing : 1/1 Running scriptlet: rdma-core-32.0-1.fc33.i686 1/1 Erasing : rdma-core-32.0-1.fc33.i686 1/2 Erasing : rdma-core-32.0-1.fc33.x86_64 2/2 Running scriptlet: rdma-core-32.0-1.fc33.x86_64 2/2 Verifying : rdma-core-32.0-1.fc33.x86_64 1/2 Verifying : rdma-core-32.0-1.fc33.i686 2/2 Removed: rdma-core-32.0-1.fc33.i686 rdma-core-32.0-1.fc33.x86_64 [root@fedoravirtual ~]# dnf install rdma-core.i686 Last metadata expiration check: 3:21:53 ago on Tue 26 Jan 2021 11:24:27 AM +03. Dependencies resolved. ============================================================================================================================================== Package Architecture Version Repository Size ============================================================================================================================================== Installing: rdma-core i686 31.0-1.fc33 fedora 61 k Transaction Summary ============================================================================================================================================== Install 1 Package Total download size: 61 k Installed size: 127 k Is this ok [y/N]: y Downloading Packages: rdma-core-31.0-1.fc33.i686.rpm 87 kB/s | 61 kB 00:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total 32 kB/s | 61 kB 00:01 Running transaction check Transaction check succeeded. Running transaction test Transaction test succeeded. snapper: creating pre_snapshot failed: error.unknown_config: org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.Failed Running transaction Preparing : 1/1 Installing : rdma-core-31.0-1.fc33.i686 1/1 Running scriptlet: rdma-core-31.0-1.fc33.i686 1/1 Verifying : rdma-core-31.0-1.fc33.i686 1/1 Installed: rdma-core-31.0-1.fc33.i686 Complete! [root@fedoravirtual ~]# dnf install rdma-core.x86_64 Last metadata expiration check: 3:22:05 ago on Tue 26 Jan 2021 11:24:27 AM +03. Dependencies resolved. ============================================================================================================================================== Package Architecture Version Repository Size ============================================================================================================================================== Installing: rdma-core x86_64 33.0-1.fc33 updates 56 k Transaction Summary ============================================================================================================================================== Install 1 Package Total download size: 56 k Installed size: 120 k Is this ok [y/N]: y Downloading Packages: rdma-core-33.0-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm 9.7 kB/s | 56 kB 00:05 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total 8.0 kB/s | 56 kB 00:07 Running transaction check Transaction check succeeded. Running transaction test The downloaded packages were saved in cache until the next successful transaction. You can remove cached packages by executing 'dnf clean packages'. Error: Transaction test error: file /etc/rdma/modules/rdma.conf from install of rdma-core-33.0-1.fc33.x86_64 conflicts with file from package rdma-core-31.0-1.fc33.i686 file /usr/lib/dracut/modules.d/05rdma/module-setup.sh from install of rdma-core-33.0-1.fc33.x86_64 conflicts with file from package rdma-core-31.0-1.fc33.i686 file /usr/lib/udev/rules.d/90-rdma-hw-modules.rules from install of rdma-core-33.0-1.fc33.x86_64 conflicts with file from package rdma-core-31.0-1.fc33.i686 file /usr/share/doc/rdma-core/udev.md from install of rdma-core-33.0-1.fc33.x86_64 conflicts with file from package rdma-core-31.0-1.fc33.i686
32-bit package also missing as well. [root@fedora ~]# cat /etc/redhat-release Fedora release 34 (Rawhide) [root@fedora ~]# dnf search rdma-core Last metadata expiration check: 0:03:21 ago on Tue 26 Jan 2021 02:50:54 PM +03. ====================================================== Name Exactly Matched: rdma-core ======================================================= rdma-core.x86_64 : RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons ========================================================== Name Matched: rdma-core =========================================================== rdma-core-devel.i686 : RDMA core development libraries and headers rdma-core-devel.x86_64 : RDMA core development libraries and headers
Onuralp from comment 5 is correct, this is actually still missing even in Rawhide: $ sudo dnf list --available --showduplicates --releasever=rawhide --repo=fedora --refresh rdma-core Fedora rawhide - x86_64 27 kB/s | 19 kB 00:00 Available Packages rdma-core.x86_64 33.0-2.fc34 fedora This can be also easily verified here: https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/development/rawhide/Everything/x86_64/os/Packages/r/ There is currently a relevant discussion on how to make a package multilib here: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/GIA77IH56DQFQBFED6YWQFFOW7JXLR6L/ Please note that I'm not saying that rdma-core *needs to be* multilib. I don't know what it is used for. But if it should be multilib, it either needs to be a requirement of some devel package (according to the email thread) or it needs to be whitelisted in Fedora Releng scripts. It if shouldn't be multilib, then... you need to ask packagers on the devel list, because I don't know how to do this properly. Perhaps the x86_64 version should obsolete the i686 version, if it is possible. I checked and I haven't found an i686 package in x86_64 repos which would require the (now missing) rdma-core.i686, so all the provides seem already handled. (In reply to Honggang LI from comment #3) > [honli@localhost ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release > Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three) > > [honli@localhost ~]$ wget -q > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/rdma-core/33.0/1.fc33/i686/rdma- > core-33.0-1.fc33.i686.rpm Honggang, I'm not sure if you understand what we're trying to point out here, or perhaps I don't understand the purpose of your console output. But the issue is not rdma-core.i686 installation (after you manually download it from Koji). The issue is that after the recent update, rdma-core.i686 disappeared from x86_64 repos. And that seems to be a direct consequence of your packaging changes.
(In reply to Kamil Páral from comment #6) > Honggang, I'm not sure if you understand what we're trying to point out I was misunderstanding what your requested, as you mentioned bug 1901086. The rpm build rdma-core-33.0-1 has regression issue https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901086#c14 . I was thinking you were requesting fix for that issue, which fixed in rdma-core-33.0-2 build. Now I understand you want rdma-core.i686 package be included in 'fedaro' repo for F33 and F32. You also want rdma-core.i686 package be included in 'rawhide' repo for F34. > here, or perhaps I don't understand the purpose of your console output. But > the issue is not rdma-core.i686 installation (after you manually download it > from Koji). The issue is that after the recent update, rdma-core.i686 > disappeared from x86_64 repos. And that seems to be a direct consequence of > your packaging changes. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901065#c5 It seems the rdma-core.i686 package will be included into 'fedora' repo again in case I revert the base package dependency for subpackages. The problem is that I don't see why some i686 packages are selected for x86_64 platform while other were not selected.
(In reply to Honggang LI from comment #7) > The problem is that I don't see why some i686 packages are selected for > x86_64 platform while other were not selected. Yes, that's tricky, please read the email thread linked in comment 6, thanks.
(In reply to Kamil Páral from comment #8) > (In reply to Honggang LI from comment #7) > > The problem is that I don't see why some i686 packages are selected for > > x86_64 platform while other were not selected. > > Yes, that's tricky, please read the email thread linked in comment 6, thanks. OK, I will revert base package dependency for F33/F32 build. But I can't revert it for Fedora-34 as I cut the dependency for Cloud/Edge image. I will file an issue in https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/issues to ask add rdma-core component into multilib white list. Thanks
rawhide: https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/issue/981 F33: (rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33) https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1678745 F32: (rdma-core-33.0-2.fc32) https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1678783
FEDORA-2021-987b06d6fe has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-987b06d6fe
FEDORA-2021-b6cae5ac96 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-b6cae5ac96
FEDORA-2021-b6cae5ac96 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-b6cae5ac96` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-b6cae5ac96 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2021-987b06d6fe has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-987b06d6fe` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-987b06d6fe See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2021-b6cae5ac96 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
Problem 2: rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686 has inferior architecture - rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository - problem with installed package rdma-core-33.0-2.fc33.i686 It was happened when I decided to upgrade to fedora 34 and If I delete ".i686" package It deletes entire "wine packages" Dependencies resolved. ========================================================================================================================================================================================== Package Architecture Version Repository Size ========================================================================================================================================================================================== Removing: rdma-core i686 33.0-2.fc33 @updates-testing 114 k Removing dependent packages: libibverbs i686 33.0-2.fc33 @updates-testing 973 k libpcap i686 14:1.9.1-6.fc33 @updates 401 k wine x86_64 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 0 Removing unused dependencies: SDL2 i686 2.0.14-1.fc33 @updates 1.6 M libFAudio i686 21.02-1.fc33 @updates-testing 258 k libFAudio x86_64 21.02-1.fc33 @updates-testing 243 k liberation-narrow-fonts noarch 2:1.07.6-4.fc33 @fedora 503 k libexif i686 0.6.22-3.fc33 @updates 2.3 M libgphoto2 i686 2.5.26-1.fc33 @updates 5.7 M libieee1284 i686 0.2.11-34.fc33 @fedora 96 k libvkd3d i686 1.2-1.fc33 @updates-testing 386 k libvkd3d x86_64 1.2-1.fc33 @updates-testing 410 k libvkd3d-shader i686 1.2-1.fc33 @updates-testing 277 k libvkd3d-shader x86_64 1.2-1.fc33 @updates-testing 278 k mesa-libOSMesa i686 20.3.4-1.fc33 @updates-testing 11 M mingw32-wine-gecko noarch 2.47.2-1.fc33 @updates 51 M mingw64-wine-gecko noarch 2.47.2-1.fc33 @updates 49 M samba-common-tools x86_64 2:4.13.4-0.fc33 @updates-testing 1.2 M samba-winbind x86_64 2:4.13.4-0.fc33 @updates-testing 1.6 M samba-winbind-clients x86_64 2:4.13.4-0.fc33 @updates-testing 162 k samba-winbind-modules x86_64 2:4.13.4-0.fc33 @updates-testing 81 k sane-backends-drivers-cameras i686 1.0.31-3.fc33 @updates 52 k sane-backends-drivers-scanners i686 1.0.31-3.fc33 @updates 12 M sane-backends-libs i686 1.0.31-3.fc33 @updates 96 k spirv-tools-libs i686 2020.5-1.20200803.git92a7165.fc33 @fedora 4.4 M wine-alsa i686 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 232 k wine-alsa x86_64 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 250 k wine-arial-fonts noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 157 k wine-capi i686 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 84 k wine-capi x86_64 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 86 k wine-cms i686 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 397 k wine-cms x86_64 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 450 k wine-common noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 142 k wine-core i686 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 464 M wine-core x86_64 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 529 M wine-courier-fonts noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 170 k wine-desktop noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 696 k wine-dxvk i686 1.7.3-1.fc33 @updates-testing 48 M wine-dxvk x86_64 1.7.3-1.fc33 @updates-testing 60 M wine-dxvk-d3d9 i686 1.7.3-1.fc33 @updates-testing 14 M wine-dxvk-d3d9 x86_64 1.7.3-1.fc33 @updates-testing 17 M wine-dxvk-dxgi i686 1.7.3-1.fc33 @updates-testing 13 M wine-dxvk-dxgi x86_64 1.7.3-1.fc33 @updates-testing 16 M wine-filesystem noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 9.2 M wine-fixedsys-fonts noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 37 k wine-fonts noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 0 wine-ldap i686 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 386 k wine-ldap x86_64 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 441 k wine-marlett-fonts noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 32 k wine-mono noarch 5.1.1-1.fc33 @updates 214 M wine-ms-sans-serif-fonts noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 4.6 M wine-openal i686 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 119 k wine-openal x86_64 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 157 k wine-opencl i686 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 143 k wine-opencl x86_64 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 156 k wine-pulseaudio i686 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 227 k wine-pulseaudio x86_64 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 240 k wine-small-fonts noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 65 k wine-symbol-fonts noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 51 k wine-system-fonts noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 121 k wine-systemd noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 119 wine-tahoma-fonts noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 300 k wine-times-new-roman-fonts noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 170 k wine-twain i686 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 282 k wine-twain x86_64 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 320 k wine-webdings-fonts noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 30 k wine-wingdings-fonts noarch 6.1-1.fc33 @updates-testing 35 k Transaction Summary ========================================================================================================================================================================================== Remove 68 Packages Freed space: 1.5 G Is this ok [y/N]: N
Onuralp, use --allowerasing when doing the system upgrade, it should only remove rdma-core.i686.
@kparal but that cannot be fixed for F34 GA. Or it needs to be documented in release notes. Can we obsolete only one architecture? Ie. can fedora-obsolete-packages obsolete: rdma-core.i686? I have never done that - so I am really curious if it would work.
(In reply to Miroslav Suchý from comment #18) > @kparal but that cannot be fixed for F34 GA. It seems we can't fix that: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rdma-core/pull-request/7 > Or it needs to be documented in > release notes. Well, it's somewhat documented in the official upgrade guide: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/dnf-system-upgrade/ We can of course highlight it in CommonBugs. I'm not sure if it is needed, but I'll tag this just to make sure we don't forget to consider it. > Can we obsolete only one architecture? Ie. can fedora-obsolete-packages > obsolete: rdma-core.i686? I have never done that - so I am really curious if > it would work. That's an interesting idea. Can you please test that? I'm not clear about all the implications this can have, though.
(In reply to Kamil Páral from comment #19) > > Can we obsolete only one architecture? Ie. can fedora-obsolete-packages > > obsolete: rdma-core.i686? I have never done that - so I am really curious if > > it would work. > > That's an interesting idea. Can you please test that? I'm not clear about > all the implications this can have, though. Spoke too soon, this will most likely hit the same problem we encountered when trying to make rdma-core.x86_64 obsolete rdma-core.i686.
FEDORA-2021-987b06d6fe has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
can fedora-obsolete-packages obsolete rdma-core.i686? AFAIK yes, but it would break the package in i686 buildroot. fedora-obsolete-packages is noarch.
*** Bug 1946246 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This message is a reminder that Fedora 33 is nearing its end of life. Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 33 on 2021-11-30. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '33'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 33 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.
Fedora 33 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2021-11-30. Fedora 33 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.