Bug 748219 - Can't update sssd, broken selinux-policy dependency
Summary: Can't update sssd, broken selinux-policy dependency
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: sssd
Version: 16
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Stephen Gallagher
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
: 748336 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks: 748336
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-10-23 08:45 UTC by Yann Droneaud
Modified: 2011-10-25 17:30 UTC (History)
7 users (show)

Fixed In Version: 389-ds-base-1.2.10-0.4.a4.fc16
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-10-25 03:38:17 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Yann Droneaud 2011-10-23 08:45:34 UTC
After booting Fedora-16-TC-x86_64-Live-Desktop,
I have enabled all software sources (fedora, updates, test-updates).

I tried to install all available updates, but transaction failed with:

sssd-1.6.2-3.fc16.x86_64 requires selinux-policy >= 3.10.0-46 : Protected multilib versions: sssd-client-1.6.1-1.fc16.i686 != sssd-client-1.6.2-3.fc16.x86_64

Comment 1 Terje Røsten 2011-10-23 18:50:59 UTC
And why is this change done?

Does really sssd need selinux-policy at all?

git has only 

- Add explicit requirement on selinux-policy version to address new SBUS
  symlinks.

bugzilla # reference is?

Or is it just that if selinux-policy (or selinux) is in use selinux-policy it must be >= 3.10.0-46.

Fixing bugs in selinux-policy in sssd seems wrong.


(I ask because I remove all selinux* rpms on my systems, however I need sssd,
adding this explicit requirement makes it impossible to remove selinux-policy)

Comment 2 Jakub Hrozek 2011-10-23 19:11:57 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> And why is this change done?
> 
> Does really sssd need selinux-policy at all?
> 
> git has only 
> 
> - Add explicit requirement on selinux-policy version to address new SBUS
>   symlinks.
> 
> bugzilla # reference is?
> 

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=747608

> Or is it just that if selinux-policy (or selinux) is in use selinux-policy it
> must be >= 3.10.0-46.
> 

The point is that SSSD 1.6.2 includes a change that *needs* the SELinux rules included in the Required: release, otherwise it won't even start. Otherwise users would run into bugs such as https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=746665

Comment 3 Terje Røsten 2011-10-23 19:18:13 UTC
Ok, would then 

Conflicts: selinux-policy < 3.10.0-46

be better?

Comment 4 Stephen Gallagher 2011-10-23 20:44:35 UTC
Yes, the correct behaviour would be Conflicts: here. I'm rebuilding the packages this way now.

Thanks for the bug report!

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2011-10-23 21:02:03 UTC
389-ds-base-1.2.10-0.4.a4.fc16, freeipa-2.1.3-4.fc16, selinux-policy-3.10.0-46.fc16, sssd-1.6.2-4.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2011-14614

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2011-10-24 04:00:17 UTC
Package 389-ds-base-1.2.10-0.4.a4.fc16, freeipa-2.1.3-4.fc16, selinux-policy-3.10.0-46.fc16, sssd-1.6.2-4.fc16:
* should fix your issue,
* was pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository,
* should be available at your local mirror within two days.
Update it with:
# su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing 389-ds-base-1.2.10-0.4.a4.fc16 freeipa-2.1.3-4.fc16 selinux-policy-3.10.0-46.fc16 sssd-1.6.2-4.fc16'
as soon as you are able to.
Please go to the following url:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2011-14614
then log in and leave karma (feedback).

Comment 7 collura 2011-10-24 07:48:14 UTC
*** Bug 748336 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2011-10-25 03:38:17 UTC
389-ds-base-1.2.10-0.4.a4.fc16, freeipa-2.1.3-4.fc16, selinux-policy-3.10.0-46.fc16, sssd-1.6.2-4.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 9 collura 2011-10-25 17:30:25 UTC
confirming that after a 'yum clean all' the 2 copies of the sssd-1.6.2-3 updates cleared out so the sssd-1.6.2-4.fc16 (x86_64) did show up and installed fine.


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