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.
Bug 2041626 - Failed to preset unit virtlogd-ro.socket and virtlockdd.socket
Summary: Failed to preset unit virtlogd-ro.socket and virtlockdd.socket
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 2032365
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9
Classification: Red Hat
Component: libvirt
Version: 9.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Virtualization Maintenance
QA Contact: yafu
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2022-01-17 22:04 UTC by Jiri Jaburek
Modified: 2022-01-18 10:39 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2022-01-18 08:26:43 UTC
Type: Bug
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Issue Tracker RHELPLAN-108354 0 None None None 2022-01-17 22:08:31 UTC

Description Jiri Jaburek 2022-01-17 22:04:54 UTC
Description of problem:

While installing libvirt-daemon, rpm prints out

Failed to preset unit: Unit file virtlogd-ro.socket does not exist.
Failed to preset unit: Unit file virtlockdd.socket does not exist.


This is likely because these are listed in:

postinstall scriptlet (using /bin/sh):

if [ $1 -eq 1 ] && [ -x /usr/bin/systemctl ]; then
    # Initial installation 
    /usr/bin/systemctl --no-reload preset virtlogd.socket virtlogd-ro.socket virtlogd-admin.socket virtlogd.service || : 
fi

if [ $1 -eq 1 ] && [ -x /usr/bin/systemctl ]; then
    # Initial installation 
    /usr/bin/systemctl --no-reload preset virtlockdd.socket virtlockdd-ro.socket virtlockdd-admin.socket virtlockdd.service || :
fi


however the relevant .socket unit files don't seem to exist inside the libvirt-daemon RPM.

Please check if they should be included or if they should be removed from the systemctl lines.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
libvirt-daemon-7.10.0-1.el9

Comment 1 yafu 2022-01-18 06:40:05 UTC
Hi Jiri,

I thinks it's the same issue with https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032365.
And the bug is fixed with libvirt-8.0.0-1.el9.x86_64.

Comment 2 Jiri Denemark 2022-01-18 08:26:43 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 2032365 ***

Comment 3 Jiri Jaburek 2022-01-18 10:39:21 UTC
(In reply to yafu from comment #1)
> Hi Jiri,
> 
> I thinks it's the same issue with
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032365.
> And the bug is fixed with libvirt-8.0.0-1.el9.x86_64.

Well, as long as both install and remove scriptlets are taken care of in bug 2032365, then it is indeed a duplicate.

I guess the search failed to find it due to the difference (preset vs remove), but it's the same idea.

Jiri


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