Description of problem: Update duplicity to latest version, run it and you will get messages like these: Import of duplicity.backends.u1backend Failed: cannot import name parse_qsl Import of duplicity.backends.webdavbackend Failed: invalid syntax (webdavbackend.py, line 301) This is because duplicity versions newer than 0.6.17-1 uses a too new syntax (finally: in this case) for the python version available on EL5. We should probably stick to 0.6.17-1 on EL5 while only updating EL6.
I just took over the package and sticking with older version would be problematic due to severe bugs in those versions which has been fixed in later ones and backporting would be too involved as well. I am thinking of pulling in python26 dependency instead. Let me know if that sounds workable to you
please try the scratch build at http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6337771
This one. really http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6337783
Somehow I only see F20 builds and no EL5 builds. Do I miss something?
Yes, the SRPM comes from a Fedora 20 box but the build is for EL5. Use the second link
Oh I see, thanks! Unfortunately, it doesn't look like it works: # duplicity Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/duplicity", line 48, in ? from duplicity import commandline File "/usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/duplicity/commandline.py", line 36, in ? from duplicity import backend File "/usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/duplicity/backend.py", line 42, in ? from duplicity import progress File "/usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/duplicity/progress.py", line 128 class ProgressTracker(): ^ SyntaxError: invalid syntax # rpm -qi duplicity Name : duplicity Relocations: (not relocatable) Version : 0.6.22 Vendor: Fedora Project Release : 3.el5 Build Date: Sat 28 Dec 2013 01:12:59 AM CET Install Date: Sun 29 Dec 2013 03:17:44 PM CET Build Host: buildvm-19.phx2.fedoraproject.org Group : Applications/Archiving Source RPM: duplicity-0.6.22-3.el5.src.rpm Size : 2589279 License: GPLv2+ Signature : (none) Packager : Fedora Project URL : http://www.nongnu.org/duplicity/ Summary : Encrypted bandwidth-efficient backup using rsync algorithm Description : Duplicity incrementally backs up files and directory by encrypting tar-format volumes with GnuPG and uploading them to a remote (or local) file server. In theory many protocols for connecting to a file server could be supported; so far ssh/scp, local file access, rsync, ftp, HSI, WebDAV and Amazon S3 have been written. Because duplicity uses librsync, the incremental archives are space efficient and only record the parts of files that have changed since the last backup. Currently duplicity supports deleted files, full unix permissions, directories, symbolic links, fifos, device files, but not hard links. # rpm -qa | grep python dbus-python-0.70-9.el5_4 python-boto-1.9b-6.el5 libselinux-python-1.33.4-5.7.el5 python-libs-2.4.3-56.el5 python-iniparse-0.2.3-6.el5 python-paramiko-1.7.6-1.el5 python-urlgrabber-3.1.0-6.el5 rpm-python-4.4.2.3-34.el5 python26-2.6.8-2.el5 python-sqlite-1.1.7-1.2.1 python-2.4.3-56.el5 libxml2-python-2.6.26-2.1.21.el5_9.3 python26-libs-2.6.8-2.el5 python-elementtree-1.2.6-5 python-GnuPGInterface-0.3.2-2.el5 audit-libs-python-1.8-2.el5 python-crypto-2.0.1-5.el5 Let me know if you need more information.
Thanks for testing. Getting a build against Python 2.6 would require a separate review. Let me see what upstream says about 2.4 compatibility. I have filed a upstream report at https://bugs.launchpad.net/duplicity/+bug/1264847. Thanks again.
Fedora EPEL 5 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2017-03-31. Fedora EPEL 5 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora or Fedora EPEL, please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.