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 2173577 - redhat-rpm-config: Add pyproject-srpm-macros to the default buildroot
Summary: redhat-rpm-config: Add pyproject-srpm-macros to the default buildroot
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9
Classification: Red Hat
Component: redhat-rpm-config
Version: 9.2
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
high
high
Target Milestone: rc
: 9.2
Assignee: Miro Hrončok
QA Contact: Eva Mrakova
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 2168193
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2023-02-27 10:02 UTC by Eva Mrakova
Modified: 2023-05-09 08:37 UTC (History)
13 users (show)

Fixed In Version: redhat-rpm-config-199-1.el9
Doc Type: No Doc Update
Doc Text:
Clone Of: 2168193
Environment:
Last Closed: 2023-05-09 07:36:27 UTC
Type: Bug
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
pm-rhel: mirror+

Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Issue Tracker RHELPLAN-149912 0 None None None 2023-02-27 10:04:06 UTC
Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2023:2228 0 None None None 2023-05-09 07:36:34 UTC

Comment 2 Honza Horak 2023-02-27 10:25:21 UTC 
What's the point of this BZ on top of Bug #2168193?
Comment 3 Tomas Orsava 2023-02-27 10:28:19 UTC 
(In reply to Honza Horak from comment #2)
> What's the point of this BZ on top of Bug #2168193?

Two components need to be updated for the change to take effect. BZ#2168193 is for the pyproject-rpm-macros component (which adds the subpackage), and this one is a clone for the redhat-rpm-config component (which pulls in the subpackage).
Comment 8 Zdenek Veleba 2023-03-20 09:23:56 UTC 
FYI there still the issue with RHEL-9.2 and 9.3 nightly composes:
package: pyproject-srpm-macros-1.6.2-1.el9.noarch from tested
    unresolved deps:
        (pyproject-rpm-macros = 1.6.2-1.el9 if pyproject-rpm-macros)
Comment 9 Miro Hrončok 2023-03-20 09:31:28 UTC 
(In reply to Zdenek Veleba from comment #8)
> FYI there still the issue with RHEL-9.2 and 9.3 nightly composes:
> package: pyproject-srpm-macros-1.6.2-1.el9.noarch from tested
>     unresolved deps:
>         (pyproject-rpm-macros = 1.6.2-1.el9 if pyproject-rpm-macros)

How do you trigger this error?

$ repoquery -q --repo=RHEL9.2-AppStream --latest=1 pyproject-srpm-macros
pyproject-srpm-macros-0:1.6.2-1.el9.noarch
$ repoquery -q --repo=RHEL9.2-CRB --latest=1 pyproject-rpm-macros
pyproject-rpm-macros-0:1.6.2-1.el9.noarch

$ repoquery -q --repo=RHEL9.3-AppStream --latest=1 pyproject-srpm-macros
pyproject-srpm-macros-0:1.6.2-1.el9.noarch
$ repoquery -q --repo=RHEL9.3-CRB --latest=1 pyproject-rpm-macros
pyproject-rpm-macros-0:1.6.2-1.el9.noarch
Comment 10 Zdenek Veleba 2023-03-20 10:02:02 UTC 
That's output from dnf-repoclosure done on AppStream repo. (I should have checked what's going on and formulate it better.)
Actually the issue is that package in AppStream repo depends on package from CRB.
CRB is optional and unsupported repository.
Comment 11 Florian Weimer 2023-03-20 10:06:33 UTC 
(In reply to Zdenek Veleba from comment #10)
> That's output from dnf-repoclosure done on AppStream repo. (I should have
> checked what's going on and formulate it better.)
> Actually the issue is that package in AppStream repo depends on package from
> CRB.
> CRB is optional and unsupported repository.

Ugh. Would you please file a new bug? This looks like a release blocker. Thanks.
Comment 12 Miro Hrončok 2023-03-20 11:08:11 UTC 
The AppStream package does not depend on a package from CRB. It depends explicitly on "(pyproject-rpm-macros = 1.6.2-1.el9 if pyproject-rpm-macros)" which does nothing in AppStream only.

It could be treated as "(nothing if never)" in the AppStream-only context.
Comment 13 Florian Weimer 2023-03-20 12:26:40 UTC 
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #12)
> The AppStream package does not depend on a package from CRB. It depends
> explicitly on "(pyproject-rpm-macros = 1.6.2-1.el9 if pyproject-rpm-macros)"
> which does nothing in AppStream only.
> 
> It could be treated as "(nothing if never)" in the AppStream-only context.

Huh. I had not considered that. It really should be okay. I now remember (other?) checks not recognizing rich dependencies like that properly.
Comment 14 Zdenek Veleba 2023-03-20 12:32:45 UTC 
So this requirement is there just to enforce the version of pyproject-rpm-macros?
Comment 15 Miro Hrončok 2023-03-20 13:46:48 UTC 
The requirement is there just to enforce the version of pyproject-rpm-macros if installed. It is rather paranoid really and could be replaced by 2 conflicts if really needed, but works as is like a charm.
Comment 16 Zdenek Veleba 2023-03-21 07:29:59 UTC 
Then it should not be an issue, we just have to modify our test. Thank you for clarification.
Comment 18 errata-xmlrpc 2023-05-09 07:36:27 UTC 
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory (redhat-rpm-config bug fix and enhancement update), and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2023:2228
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.