Re: Fixing an uninstallable package
On 01. 09. 20 23:32, Tony Asleson wrote: On 9/1/20 12:29 PM, Tony Asleson wrote: On 9/1/20 12:10 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 01. 09. 20 15:39, Tony Asleson wrote: A few weeks ago the package pywbem was updated to latest upstream release and exists in rawhide repo. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-1f878bb809 The package fails to install because of newly added dependencies that were introduced upstream. So previous working package was python3-pywbem-0.14.6-4.fc34.noarch failing to install and wouldn't work if it did python3-pywbem-1.0.1-1.fc34.noarch.rpm From looking at docs it would appear that utilizing epoch is the answer and I have that ready to go, ref. https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pywbem/pull-request/5 . My question is would it be acceptable to remove the broken package from koji and bump and rebuild the previous working version as no one was able to install it anyway? We cannot remove the package from Koji, but yes -- when you do a new build with higher release than the latest installbale package, you don't need to bump (introduce) the epoch. OK, I'll strip the epoch and give it a try. I tried this and it's not looking good at the moment. The automated tests are reporting some failures which I believe indicate versioning is a problem. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-afae078032 Maybe I'm not understanding your response correctly, but I'm still thinking I need to introduce epoch into the spec file to get dnf and other tools to figure the versioning out. I believe you don't. The tests do a static analysis and they are correct, but if it was indeed impossible to ever install python3-pywbem-1.0.1-1.fc33, than you don't have to worry about it, because in reality, it won't ever be a problem. Just make sure to do it before Fedora 33 Final freeze, so the uninstallable but higher version doesn't end up in the "fedora" repo forever. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fixing an uninstallable package
On 9/1/20 12:29 PM, Tony Asleson wrote: > On 9/1/20 12:10 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote: >> On 01. 09. 20 15:39, Tony Asleson wrote: >>> A few weeks ago the package pywbem was updated to latest upstream >>> release and exists in rawhide repo. >>> >>> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-1f878bb809 >>> >>> The package fails to install because of newly added dependencies that >>> were introduced upstream. >>> >>> So previous working package was >>> >>> python3-pywbem-0.14.6-4.fc34.noarch >>> >>> >>> failing to install and wouldn't work if it did >>> >>> python3-pywbem-1.0.1-1.fc34.noarch.rpm >>> >>> >>> From looking at docs it would appear that utilizing epoch is the answer >>> and I have that ready to go, ref. >>> >>> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pywbem/pull-request/5 . >>> >>> My question is would it be acceptable to remove the broken package from >>> koji and bump and rebuild the previous working version as no one was >>> able to install it anyway? >> >> We cannot remove the package from Koji, but yes -- when you do a new >> build with higher release than the latest installbale package, you don't >> need to bump (introduce) the epoch. > > OK, I'll strip the epoch and give it a try. I tried this and it's not looking good at the moment. The automated tests are reporting some failures which I believe indicate versioning is a problem. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-afae078032 Maybe I'm not understanding your response correctly, but I'm still thinking I need to introduce epoch into the spec file to get dnf and other tools to figure the versioning out. -Tony ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fixing an uninstallable package
On 9/1/20 12:10 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 01. 09. 20 15:39, Tony Asleson wrote: >> A few weeks ago the package pywbem was updated to latest upstream >> release and exists in rawhide repo. >> >> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-1f878bb809 >> >> The package fails to install because of newly added dependencies that >> were introduced upstream. >> >> So previous working package was >> >> python3-pywbem-0.14.6-4.fc34.noarch >> >> >> failing to install and wouldn't work if it did >> >> python3-pywbem-1.0.1-1.fc34.noarch.rpm >> >> >> From looking at docs it would appear that utilizing epoch is the answer >> and I have that ready to go, ref. >> >> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pywbem/pull-request/5 . >> >> My question is would it be acceptable to remove the broken package from >> koji and bump and rebuild the previous working version as no one was >> able to install it anyway? > > We cannot remove the package from Koji, but yes -- when you do a new > build with higher release than the latest installbale package, you don't > need to bump (introduce) the epoch. OK, I'll strip the epoch and give it a try. Thanks, Tony ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fixing an uninstallable package
On 01. 09. 20 15:39, Tony Asleson wrote: A few weeks ago the package pywbem was updated to latest upstream release and exists in rawhide repo. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-1f878bb809 The package fails to install because of newly added dependencies that were introduced upstream. So previous working package was python3-pywbem-0.14.6-4.fc34.noarch failing to install and wouldn't work if it did python3-pywbem-1.0.1-1.fc34.noarch.rpm From looking at docs it would appear that utilizing epoch is the answer and I have that ready to go, ref. https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pywbem/pull-request/5 . My question is would it be acceptable to remove the broken package from koji and bump and rebuild the previous working version as no one was able to install it anyway? We cannot remove the package from Koji, but yes -- when you do a new build with higher release than the latest installbale package, you don't need to bump (introduce) the epoch. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fixing an uninstallable package
A few weeks ago the package pywbem was updated to latest upstream release and exists in rawhide repo. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-1f878bb809 The package fails to install because of newly added dependencies that were introduced upstream. So previous working package was python3-pywbem-0.14.6-4.fc34.noarch failing to install and wouldn't work if it did python3-pywbem-1.0.1-1.fc34.noarch.rpm From looking at docs it would appear that utilizing epoch is the answer and I have that ready to go, ref. https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pywbem/pull-request/5 . My question is would it be acceptable to remove the broken package from koji and bump and rebuild the previous working version as no one was able to install it anyway? At the moment we aren't sure how we want to handle the change & newly added dependencies to the latest upstream version. This package may ultimately get orphaned. Thanks, Tony ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
