Bug 1937956 - acl-2.3.0 is available
Summary: acl-2.3.0 is available
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: acl
Version: 34
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Kamil Dudka
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 1938459
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2021-03-11 19:22 UTC by Upstream Release Monitoring
Modified: 2021-04-01 00:51 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version: acl-2.3.0-1.fc35 acl-2.3.1-1.fc34
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
: 1938459 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2021-04-01 00:51:31 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
[patch] Update to 2.3.0 (#1937956) (994 bytes, patch)
2021-03-11 19:22 UTC, Upstream Release Monitoring
no flags Details | Diff

Description Upstream Release Monitoring 2021-03-11 19:22:47 UTC
Latest upstream release: 2.3.0
Current version/release in rawhide: 2.2.53-10.fc34
URL: https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/acl

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/


More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring


Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream.


Based on the information from anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/16/

Comment 1 Upstream Release Monitoring 2021-03-11 19:22:52 UTC
Created attachment 1762769 [details]
[patch] Update to 2.3.0 (#1937956)

Comment 2 Upstream Release Monitoring 2021-03-11 19:27:07 UTC
the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of acl-2.3.0-1.fc32.src.rpm for rawhide failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=63616746

Comment 3 Kamil Dudka 2021-03-12 08:31:06 UTC
dist-git commit: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/acl/c/3b266dc3

Comment 4 Fedora Update System 2021-03-12 08:43:38 UTC
FEDORA-2021-15b0781993 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-15b0781993

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2021-03-12 18:56:21 UTC
FEDORA-2021-15b0781993 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-15b0781993`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-15b0781993

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 6 Lars S. Jensen 2021-03-13 12:27:04 UTC
The upgrade of fc34 trigger a lot from missing lilbacl.1.so errors by postinstall scripts for grub2/kernel
Upgraded: libacl-2.3.0-1.fc34.x86_64
There was no kernel files for version -5.11.6-300.fc34.x86_64 in /boot and grub is TBD:

 cp: error while loading shared libraries: libacl.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
warning: %posttrans(grub2-common-1:2.04-39.fc34.noarch) scriptlet failed, exit status 127
sed: error while loading shared libraries: libacl.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
...
head: write error: Broken pipe
sed: error while loading shared libraries: libacl.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
head: write error: Broken pipe
cp: error while loading shared libraries: libacl.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
dracut: dracut: creation of /boot/initramfs-5.11.6-300.fc34.x86_64.img failed
warning: %posttrans(kernel-core-5.11.6-300.fc34.x86_64) scriptlet failed, exit status 1

Workaround was to reinstall grub2/kernel before reboot:
dnf reinstall kernel-*-*5.11.6-300.fc34  kernel-*5.11.6-300.fc34  grub2-*

Comment 7 Kamil Dudka 2021-03-13 13:12:07 UTC
Honestly, I have no idea what happened on your system.  I am not able to reproduce it but will revoke the f34 update to stay on the safe side.

Could you please check what happened with libacl.so.1 ?

Please paste the output of the following commands:

# ldd /usr/bin/cp

# ls -l /usr/lib64/libacl.so*

# stat /usr/lib64/libacl.so.1 $(realpath /usr/lib64/libacl.so.1)

# rpm -V libacl

Comment 8 Lars S. Jensen 2021-03-13 13:41:50 UTC
This PC have been system-upgrade from FC33 10 day ago and the last upgrade before was 6 days ago.

ldd /usr/bin/cp
	linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffc6c7c7000)
	libselinux.so.1 => /lib64/libselinux.so.1 (0x00007f87fbac1000)
	libacl.so.1 => /lib64/libacl.so.1 (0x00007f87fbab6000)
	libattr.so.1 => /lib64/libattr.so.1 (0x00007f87fbaae000)
	libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00007f87fb8df000)
	libpcre2-8.so.0 => /lib64/libpcre2-8.so.0 (0x00007f87fb848000)
	libdl.so.2 => /lib64/libdl.so.2 (0x00007f87fb841000)
	/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f87fbb29000)

  ls -l /usr/lib64/libacl.so*
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root    17 Mar 13 11:45 /usr/lib64/libacl.so.1 -> libacl.so.1.1.230
-rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 41208 Mar 12 09:32 /usr/lib64/libacl.so.1.1.230
stat /usr/lib64/libacl.so.1 $(realpath /usr/lib64/libacl.so.1)
  File: /usr/lib64/libacl.so.1 -> libacl.so.1.1.230
  Size: 17        	Blocks: 8          IO Block: 4096   symbolic link
Device: 23h/35d	Inode: 1660415     Links: 1
Access: (0777/lrwxrwxrwx)  Uid: (    0/    root)   Gid: (    0/    root)
Context: unconfined_u:object_r:lib_t:s0
Access: 2021-03-13 11:45:26.083672539 +0100
Modify: 2021-03-13 11:45:26.083672539 +0100
Change: 2021-03-13 11:45:26.083672539 +0100
 Birth: 2021-03-13 11:45:26.083672539 +0100
  File: /usr/lib64/libacl.so.1.1.230
  Size: 41208     	Blocks: 88         IO Block: 4096   regular file
Device: 23h/35d	Inode: 1618674     Links: 1
Access: (0755/-rwxr-xr-x)  Uid: (    0/    root)   Gid: (    0/    root)
Context: system_u:object_r:lib_t:s0
Access: 2021-03-12 09:32:45.000000000 +0100
Modify: 2021-03-12 09:32:45.000000000 +0100
Change: 2021-03-13 11:42:52.932981512 +0100
 Birth: 2021-03-13 11:42:52.931981522 +0100

rpm -V libacl
#no issue:
rpm -V libacl --verbose 
.........  a /usr/lib/.build-id
.........  a /usr/lib/.build-id/70
.........  a /usr/lib/.build-id/70/94938cb34f623676283e98762b40867adba416
.........    /usr/lib64/libacl.so.1
.........    /usr/lib64/libacl.so.1.1.230


The upgrade was done with:
dnf --verbose --allowerasing  --obsoletes distro-sync  --refresh --skip-broken.

Can it be the creation of the link to libacl.so.1.1.230 that is delayed

2021-03-13T11:42:52+0100 SUBDEBUG Upgrade: libibverbs-34.0-2.fc34.x86_64
2021-03-13T11:42:52+0100 SUBDEBUG Upgrade: libattr-2.5.0-1.fc34.x86_64
2021-03-13T11:42:52+0100 SUBDEBUG Upgrade: libacl-2.3.0-1.fc34.x86_64
2021-03-13T11:42:52+0100 SUBDEBUG Upgrade: acl-2.3.0-1.fc34.x86_64
2021-03-13T11:42:52+0100 SUBDEBUG Upgrade: librdmacm-34.0-2.fc34.x86_64
2021-03-13T11:42:53+0100 SUBDEBUG Upgrade: librados2-2:16.1.0-0.5.snapshot.fc34.x86_64

2021-03-13T11:44:51+0100 SUBDEBUG Upgraded: mariadb-common-3:10.5.8-8.fc34.x86_64
2021-03-13T11:44:51+0100 SUBDEBUG Upgraded: libacl-2.2.53-10.fc34.x86_64
2021-03-13T11:44:51+0100 SUBDEBUG Upgraded: perl-NDBM_File-1.15-472.fc34.x86_64
2021-03-13T11:44:51+0100 SUBDEBUG Upgraded: perl-libs-4:5.32.1-472.fc34.x86_64


2021-03-13T11:44:54+0100 SUBDEBUG Upgraded: btrfs-progs-5.10-2.fc34.x86_64
2021-03-13T11:44:54+0100 INFO cp: error while loading shared libraries: libacl.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
warning: %posttrans(grub2-common-1:2.04-39.fc34.noarch) scriptlet failed, exit status 127

2021-03-13T11:44:54+0100 ERROR Error in POSTTRANS scriptlet in rpm package grub2-common
2021-03-13T11:44:55+0100 INFO systemctl: error while loading shared libraries: libacl.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory



I have 2 other PC with FC34 i can give it a try and one FC33 that i would like to give system-upgrade.

Comment 9 Lars S. Jensen 2021-03-13 13:52:18 UTC
Can it be the creation of the link to libacl.so.1.1.230 that is delayed?

This link is create after the error:

lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root    17 Mar 13 11:45 /usr/lib64/libacl.so.1 -> libacl.so.1.1.230
Access: 2021-03-13 11:45:26.083672539 +0100


2021-03-13T11:44:54+0100 INFO cp: error while loading shared libraries: libacl.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
warning: %posttrans(grub2-common-1:2.04-39.fc34.noarch) scriptlet failed, exit status 127

Comment 10 Lars S. Jensen 2021-03-13 14:16:45 UTC
This link is create 1s after the last error in dnf.rpm.log this is also the last entry:
dracut: dracut: creation of /boot/initramfs-5.11.6-300.fc34.x86_64.img failed
warning: %posttrans(kernel-core-5.11.6-300.fc34.x86_64) scriptlet failed, exit status 1

2021-03-13T11:45:25+0100 ERROR Error in POSTTRANS scriptlet in rpm package kernel-core

but still in dnf transaction dnf.log:
2021-03-13T11:45:37+0100 DDEBUG RPM transaction over.
2021-03-13T11:45:43+0100 DDEBUG timer: verify transaction: 5492 ms

Comment 11 Kamil Dudka 2021-03-13 14:30:49 UTC
The resulting state seems correct to me.  Both libacl.so.1 and libacl.so.1.1.230 are installed by a single RPM package.  I can see with strace that the files are installed in a suboptimal order (the symlink first) but unless something else tries to load libacl.so.1 in the critical window during installation of a single RPM package, everything should just work.  I know that `rpm` itself links against libacl but if the updates runs sequentially, this should also be fine.

In any case, it is unclear what libacl could do better.  I will clone this bug for dnf.

Comment 12 Kamil Dudka 2021-03-13 14:57:59 UTC
(In reply to Lars S. Jensen from comment #8)
> I have 2 other PC with FC34 i can give it a try and one FC33 that i would
> like to give system-upgrade.

Please let me know how the other updates went.  Unless you encounter the same problem again, I will conclude that it was just an unfortunate coincidence and push the f34 update back to testing.  Thanks in advance!

Comment 13 Lars S. Jensen 2021-03-13 15:40:09 UTC
This in not a bug in libacl because libattr have the same issue:
this link is update after the rpm was done: 

 ls -l /usr/lib64/libattr.so*
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root    18 Mar 13 11:45 /usr/lib64/libattr.so.1 -> libattr.so.1.1.250
-rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 28656 Mar 12 09:29 /usr/lib64/libattr.so.1.1.250

stat /usr/lib64/libattr.so.1 $(realpath /usr/lib64/libattr.so.1)
  File: /usr/lib64/libattr.so.1 -> libattr.so.1.1.250
  Size: 18        	Blocks: 8          IO Block: 4096   symbolic link
Device: 23h/35d	Inode: 1660416     Links: 1
Access: (0777/lrwxrwxrwx)  Uid: (    0/    root)   Gid: (    0/    root)
Context: unconfined_u:object_r:lib_t:s0
Access: 2021-03-13 11:45:26.083672539 +0100
Modify: 2021-03-13 11:45:26.083672539 +0100
Change: 2021-03-13 11:45:26.083672539 +0100
 Birth: 2021-03-13 11:45:26.083672539 +0100
  File: /usr/lib64/libattr.so.1.1.250
  Size: 28656     	Blocks: 56         IO Block: 4096   regular file
Device: 23h/35d	Inode: 1618671     Links: 1
Access: (0755/-rwxr-xr-x)  Uid: (    0/    root)   Gid: (    0/    root)
Context: system_u:object_r:lib_t:s0
Access: 2021-03-12 09:29:55.000000000 +0100
Modify: 2021-03-12 09:29:55.000000000 +0100
Change: 2021-03-13 11:42:52.905981774 +0100
 Birth: 2021-03-13 11:42:52.904981784 +0100

Comment 14 Lars S. Jensen 2021-03-13 16:14:07 UTC
I have done the upgrade on PC that was last upgrade yesterday and that is OK.
So is a bad combination of rpm version.

I will do a system-upgrade on the FC33 machine to check if it is issue.

Comment 15 Kamil Dudka 2021-03-13 17:37:37 UTC
(In reply to Lars S. Jensen from comment #13)
> This in not a bug in libacl because libattr have the same issue:

libacl and libattr are both from the same update update, which has been temporarily unpushed:

    https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-15b0781993

Comment 16 Lars S. Jensen 2021-03-13 17:52:16 UTC
System-upgrade on the FC33 machine to FC34 is OK.

So is a bad combination of fc34 rpm versions that trigger the issue.

Comment 17 Fedora Update System 2021-03-14 14:33:59 UTC
FEDORA-2021-15b0781993 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-15b0781993

Comment 18 Fedora Update System 2021-03-14 19:15:32 UTC
FEDORA-2021-15b0781993 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-15b0781993`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-15b0781993

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 19 Fedora Update System 2021-03-16 08:04:30 UTC
FEDORA-2021-97d1d801e4 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-97d1d801e4

Comment 20 Fedora Update System 2021-03-16 14:44:08 UTC
FEDORA-2021-97d1d801e4 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-97d1d801e4`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-97d1d801e4

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 21 Fedora Update System 2021-04-01 00:51:31 UTC
FEDORA-2021-97d1d801e4 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


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