Description of problem: opendmarc-tools from EPEL 10 has one or more unresolved dependencies, causing it to be uninstallable. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): opendmarc-tools-1.4.2-25.el10_0 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. dnf install opendmarc-tools Actual results: Error: Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides perl(Switch) needed by opendmarc-tools-1.4.2-25.el10_0.x86_64 from epel Expected results: successful installation Additional info: If the solution to this is to add additional packages to EPEL 10, but you don't have access to add them yourself, follow the request process in the EPEL documentation. Once you have filed the corresponding bugs, mark them as blocking this bug. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-package-request/ If you think resolving this will take a long time, and would prefer to remove this uninstallable package from EPEL 10 in the meantime, just say so in this ticket and I can untag the build for you. This won't retire the branch, so as soon as the underlying problem is resolved you can re-publish by creating a new update.
To avoid having the uninstallable packages present in the repos, I have untagged the relevant builds so they will not be included in the next composes. The epel10 branches have not been retired, so as soon as the dependencies are available you can re-publish the package by creating a new builds and updates.
Thanks Carl for taking care. I'll rebuild opendmarc once https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2348413 is available.
I've send a direct mail to Spot, he's usually way more responsive this way than with bugzilla mail.
I reviewed if it would be possible to migrate of Switch module, but although code to migrate is simple, depending on the Perl version requires different solution so it may be the best option to continue with Switch module. Have you tried to contact Spot using his alternative address as shown here https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Spot ?
Yes, I've mailed both addresses, usually the aws one works better.
perl-Switch is available in EPEL10 now. Carl, can last build[1] be tagged or do we need to create a new build? [1] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2708722
*** Bug 2367060 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 2372884 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I’ve created a working RPM for AlmaLinux 10 that includes a functional version of OpenDMARC. You can find the full SPEC file and SRPM here: https://github.com/redadmin-k/opendmarc-almalinux10-rpm If this is helpful for resolving the issue, please feel free to refer to or incorporate any of my adjustments. I’ve tested it in production, and it resolves the problem described in this ticket. Regards, redadmin-k
The OpenDMARC package works flawlessly on AlmaLinux 10. Here is a verified `systemctl status` output showing the service running for over 6 hours without issue. This confirms that the build and runtime environment for RHEL 10 compatible systems supports OpenDMARC without modification. + The RPM was rebuilt from the EPEL 9 spec with minimal changes. + If needed, I can provide the full SRPM or spec for review. [root@dev-alma10 redadmin]# systemctl status opendmarc ● opendmarc.service - Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (DMARC) Milter Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/opendmarc.service; disabled; preset: disabled) Active: active (running) since Sun 2025-06-15 16:40:02 JST; 6h ago Invocation: fd8743fb0c244f91b874b83bd1f0a708 Docs: man:opendmarc(8) man:opendmarc.conf(5) man:opendmarc-import(8) man:opendmarc-reports(8) http://www.trusteddomain.org/opendmarc/ Main PID: 2331009 (opendmarc) Tasks: 3 (limit: 23177) Memory: 600K (peak: 1.4M) CPU: 200ms CGroup: /system.slice/opendmarc.service mq2331009 /usr/sbin/opendmarc -f -c /etc/opendmarc.conf Jun 15 16:40:02 dev-alma10.redadmin.org systemd[1]: Started opendmarc.service - Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (DMARC) Milter. Jun 15 16:40:02 dev-alma10.redadmin.org opendmarc[2331009]: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 starting (args: -f -c /etc/opendmarc.conf) Jun 15 16:40:02 dev-alma10.redadmin.org opendmarc[2331009]: additional trusted authentication services: (none) [root@dev-alma10 redadmin]# un
*** Bug 2372941 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Hi Mikel, Thanks for the update. Just to clarify: I’ve already started working on the opendmarc package and have prepared a fork for EPEL10 under my FAS account (redadmin). You can see it here: → https://src.fedoraproject.org/forks/redadmin/rpms/opendmarc Since the missing dependency issue is now resolved in EPEL10, I’d like to take over the package maintenance and rebuild it. Please let me know if you're okay with orphaning or transferring the package so I can proceed with unretirement and future updates. Thanks, Akiyoshi Kurita (FAS: redadmin)
> Just to clarify: I’ve already started working on the opendmarc package and have prepared a fork for EPEL10 under my FAS account (redadmin). You can see it here: Unless you want to change something, this is not needed. Package has EPEL10 branches and has the same version as rawhide. As explained in the other BZ, opendmarc is able to build in EL10, it's just that it was removed due to install time dependency being missing. > Since the missing dependency issue is now resolved in EPEL10, I’d like to take over the package maintenance and rebuild it. > Please let me know if you're okay with orphaning or transferring the package so I can proceed with unretirement and future updates. Co-maintainers are always welcome. I would appreciate in case you want to change something to send a PR against rawhide and we can work from there. To be co-maintainer you would need to be in the packagers group.
Dear Mikel, Thank you for your detailed explanation and for your efforts regarding the opendmarc package. I understand that the package already has an EPEL10 branch and matches the Rawhide version, and that the previous missing dependency issue has been resolved. My primary goal is to become an EPEL packager, as I manage servers for Japanese government-related organizations, labor unions, and postal services, where official RPM maintenance credentials are essential. I would like to proceed by contributing improvements and working on the Rawhide branch via pull requests, as you suggested. Could you please guide me on the process to join the packagers group to become a co-maintainer? Thank you for your support and cooperation. Best regards, redadmin (Akiyoshi Kurita)
> Carl, can last build[1] be tagged or do we need to create a new build? I looked at retagging but it appears that the builds have been untagged for too long and have been garbage collected, meaning the artifacts have been deleted. A rebuild will be necessary.
Thank you, Carl. Understood that the previous builds have been garbage collected. I'm happy to rebuild opendmarc for EPEL10. Please let me know if there's anything I should coordinate with the current maintainer before proceeding. Otherwise, I will submit a pull request and initiate the build process. Best regards, Akiyoshi Kurita (redadmin)
Dear Mikel, Following guidance from the EPEL mailing list, I would like to formally request co-maintainership of the opendmarc package. This is important for my role managing production servers for public institutions in Japan, as official listing as a maintainer is required for compliance purposes. If you agree, could you please grant me access via the Fedora SCM interface? Thank you very much for your understanding. Best regards, Akiyoshi Kurita (redadmin)
Hi Kurita, This is not the right venue for such an enquiry, you'll have to prove you understand how packaging works first. Here is the starting point: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Joining_the_Package_Maintainers/ Go from there and you'll eventually find a sponsor and become a proud Fedora packager. Regards, Xavier
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-6da3ba3feb (opendmarc-1.4.2-30.el10_1) has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 10.1. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-6da3ba3feb
Thank you and congratulations on the successful merge of OpenDMARC into EPEL! I appreciate everyone's support during the review process. I will continue contributing to EPEL through additional packages moving forward. Best regards, Akiyoshi Kurita (FAS: redadmin)
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-6da3ba3feb has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 10.1 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-6da3ba3feb See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
*** Bug 2372942 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***