Hi.

I recently stumbled over bug #1465 (as can be seen in my report #1864, I
initially didn't find #1465). This bug is a major problem for us,
especially because of it causing puppet to fail in a very non-obvious
way (doesn't install a package it is explicitly asked to install,
without giving any error message).

The bug itself is a bit more complex than the issue we stumbled over (as
it also causes other problems, which are pretty minor in comparison, see
comment below), but the main issue, which is puppet thinking that
package.arch_a is installed when only package.arch_b is actually installed.

Bug #1465 is marked as needing more information, which I believe I
provided in my comments on #1465 and #1864.

Is anyone able to help me fixing this bug? I'm by no means fluent in
Ruby yet, so would need someone do some coding that I'm unable to do. I
can help with testing patches though.

Regarding the other issues caused by this:
There are at least three incarnations of the bug, if you want to see it
that way:
1) Packages of a specific architecture are not installed by puppet if
the same package is already installed in another architecture.
2) If multiple architectures are installed, puppet only removes the
packages one at a time (one per catalog run), since puppet doesn't know
that there are multiple instances.
3) If multiple architectures are installed, only one of them is kept at
the most recent version with ensure=>latest, if I understand the issue
correctly. At the very least, this is true if the first package listed
by RPM is already at the latest available version.
NOTE: The third incarnation is a possible security threat!

Anyway, the fix for the first incarnation should be relatively easy, I
provided a suggestion in my comments to one of the bugs.
The second one is sub-optimal, but not really disturbing, since the
package will be remove completely by the n-th run (where n is the number
of architectures, usually 1 or 2).
The third one is the one with the biggest potential problems arrising
from it, but requires more intrusive changes to the rpm and/or yum
provider(s), which is already known, from the number of FIXME entries in
the respective files.

regards,
Sven

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to