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the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.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.
I'm trying to package swtpm for EPEL 8 in #1939674, which depends on softhsm, among other packages. The dependency lookup currently fails with:
Error:
Problem: conflicting requests
- package softhsm-2.6.0-3.module_el8.3.0+482+9e103aab.x86_64 is filtered out by modular filtering
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages)
which makes sense, as softhsm is part of the DL1 module stream in the idm module. What would be the right approach to make it available for EPEL builds in this case?
Note: I'm not putting this down as a blocking bug for #1939674 because luckily softhsm isn't actually required to build swtpm, so I think I can workaround things for the time being, but it would still be good to get this sorted out.
Comment 2Alexander Bokovoy
2021-03-24 06:55:33 UTC
There are two solutions here, both purely EPEL-related.
1. You can package swtpm as a module stream. In that module definition you can mark dependency on idm:DL1 both in build and regular dependencies. This would make swtpm buildable and installable with automatic enablement of idm:DL1 to pick up softhsm.
2. According to the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#Policy,
------
In EPEL8 or later, it is also permitted to provide an alternative non-modular package to any package found only in a non-default RHEL module.
------
The the latter case it would be your own packaging of softhsm.