Re: [Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
On Thu, 2012-04-05 at 23:34 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
John Reiser wrote:
Or, some packager forgot to use %{?_isa} when specifying package
dependencies which are [or become] architecture-dependent. This is a
common and systematic error which causes much grief. None of the tools
check for it, which is another bug^Wopportunity for enhancement.
%{?_isa} wouldn't really fix this. It'd just change the error from
protected multilib versions to unresolvable dependencies. The real issue
is that the repository contains packages with broken dependencies, and
there's no magic bullet to fix that in yum or in the packaging. There is,
however, talk about enforcing the AutoQA dependency checks on the Bodhi end,
which should fix that problem in most cases.
AFAICS the real problem here is that an update got unpushed. It seems
like Richard got the 64-bit version of libvirt -3 installed, then the -3
update got unpushed, then something wanted to install the 32-bit version
of libvirt. Obviously, since the update had been unpushed, it was
impossible to find the matching 32-bit version.
As long as updates can be unpushed, that one can pop up.
The other classic case where we get a lot of this (and similar errors)
is when we push the fedora-release update which disables
updates-testing; people have the 64-bit version of something installed
from updates-testing, then they need to have the 32-bit version
installed, but now updates-testing is disabled...
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
Adam Williamson wrote: AFAICS the real problem here is that an update got unpushed. It seems like Richard got the 64-bit version of libvirt -3 installed, then the -3 update got unpushed, then something wanted to install the 32-bit version of libvirt. Obviously, since the update had been unpushed, it was impossible to find the matching 32-bit version. As long as updates can be unpushed, that one can pop up. Oh, so this is yet another example of fallout from the braindead decision to enable updates-testing by default for Branched. The other classic case where we get a lot of this (and similar errors) is when we push the fedora-release update which disables updates-testing; people have the 64-bit version of something installed from updates-testing, then they need to have the 32-bit version installed, but now updates-testing is disabled... And that's the other reason why that decision is broken. updates-testing should NEVER be on by default. There is no expectation of upgrade path in updates-testing (whereas there is one even in Rawhide!), so enabling it by default is very broken. Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
On Thu, 2012-04-19 at 17:14 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: Adam Williamson wrote: AFAICS the real problem here is that an update got unpushed. It seems like Richard got the 64-bit version of libvirt -3 installed, then the -3 update got unpushed, then something wanted to install the 32-bit version of libvirt. Obviously, since the update had been unpushed, it was impossible to find the matching 32-bit version. As long as updates can be unpushed, that one can pop up. Oh, so this is yet another example of fallout from the braindead decision to enable updates-testing by default for Branched. Um...no? The case listed *below* would be, but updates-testing doesn't seem particularly relevant to the above case. If updates-testing didn't exist at all, you'd still have the potential of this problem happening if updates could be unpushed. The other classic case where we get a lot of this (and similar errors) is when we push the fedora-release update which disables updates-testing; people have the 64-bit version of something installed from updates-testing, then they need to have the 32-bit version installed, but now updates-testing is disabled... And that's the other reason why that decision is broken. updates-testing should NEVER be on by default. There is no expectation of upgrade path in updates-testing (whereas there is one even in Rawhide!), so enabling it by default is very broken. Yes and no. It's 'very broken' in the sense that we know it can cause a bit of this kind of pain for people who install pre-releases and update them to final releases. However, we're perfectly aware of the general sorts of issues the process can cause and consider them to be an acceptable trade-off for the considerable _benefits_ of having updates-testing enabled by default (lots more testing of the packages). We really mean the whole thing about pre-releases eating babies, and this is just one instance of that. If you're not prepared to do a bit of yum handholding to work around issues like this now and again, you have no business installing a pre-release of Fedora. I'm not sure it's practically possible to make that *not* the case. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
Adam Williamson wrote: Um...no? The case listed *below* would be, but updates-testing doesn't seem particularly relevant to the above case. If updates-testing didn't exist at all, you'd still have the potential of this problem happening if updates could be unpushed. Stable updates cannot be unpushed. Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 11:34:29PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
John Reiser wrote:
Or, some packager forgot to use %{?_isa} when specifying package
dependencies which are [or become] architecture-dependent. This is a
common and systematic error which causes much grief. None of the tools
check for it, which is another bug^Wopportunity for enhancement.
%{?_isa} wouldn't really fix this. It'd just change the error from
protected multilib versions to unresolvable dependencies. The real issue
is that the repository contains packages with broken dependencies, and
there's no magic bullet to fix that in yum or in the packaging. There is,
however, talk about enforcing the AutoQA dependency checks on the Bodhi end,
which should fix that problem in most cases.
Well it could, if we were smarter about the order in which files on
the mirrors got updated.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines. Tiny program with many
powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc.
http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
I still get this error several times a week, and I still have no idea what it means or how I'm supposed to respond to it (other than fiddling randomly with packages until it goes away). The latest one: # yum install /usr/sbin/libvirtd [... yum spew deleted ...] Error: Protected multilib versions: libvirt-client-0.9.10-2.fc17.i686 != libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17.x86_64 $ rpm -qa | grep libvirt-client libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17.x86_64 What does the error mean? Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones New in Fedora 11: Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and build Windows installers. Over 70 libraries supprt'd http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW http://www.annexia.org/fedora_mingw -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote: I still get this error several times a week, and I still have no idea what it means or how I'm supposed to respond to it (other than fiddling randomly with packages until it goes away). The latest one: # yum install /usr/sbin/libvirtd [... yum spew deleted ...] Error: Protected multilib versions: libvirt-client-0.9.10-2.fc17.i686 != libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17.x86_64 $ rpm -qa | grep libvirt-client libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17.x86_64 What does the error mean? The 32bit and 64bit version of a lib must match. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 2:41 PM, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote: I still get this error several times a week, and I still have no idea what it means or how I'm supposed to respond to it (other than fiddling randomly with packages until it goes away). The latest one: # yum install /usr/sbin/libvirtd [... yum spew deleted ...] Error: Protected multilib versions: libvirt-client-0.9.10-2.fc17.i686 != libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17.x86_64 $ rpm -qa | grep libvirt-client libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17.x86_64 What does the error mean? The 32bit and 64bit version of a lib must match. Err clicked send too soon. For some reason you seem to be installing -2.ii686 while you have -3.x86_64 installed ... outdated mirror? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 01:23:28PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: I still get this error several times a week, and I still have no idea what it means or how I'm supposed to respond to it (other than fiddling randomly with packages until it goes away). The latest one: # yum install /usr/sbin/libvirtd [... yum spew deleted ...] Error: Protected multilib versions: libvirt-client-0.9.10-2.fc17.i686 != libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17.x86_64 $ rpm -qa | grep libvirt-client libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17.x86_64 What does the error mean? You have both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions of libvirt-client-0.9.10-2.fc17 installed. Your yum update command is trying to pull in the libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17 and is only finding the x86_64 version in your yum repos. Either you manually installed a 32bit RPM that was not via the yum repos, or your yum repos have lost the 32-bit RPMs, or perhaps you have blacklisted 32-bit RPMs in your yum conf. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o-http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 02:13:34PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 01:23:28PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: I still get this error several times a week, and I still have no idea what it means or how I'm supposed to respond to it (other than fiddling randomly with packages until it goes away). The latest one: # yum install /usr/sbin/libvirtd [... yum spew deleted ...] Error: Protected multilib versions: libvirt-client-0.9.10-2.fc17.i686 != libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17.x86_64 $ rpm -qa | grep libvirt-client libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17.x86_64 What does the error mean? You have both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions of libvirt-client-0.9.10-2.fc17 installed. Your yum update command is trying to pull in the libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17 and is only finding the x86_64 version in your yum repos. Either you manually installed a 32bit RPM that was not via the yum repos, or your yum repos have lost the 32-bit RPMs, or perhaps you have blacklisted 32-bit RPMs in your yum conf. Oh, and incidentally you don't want to be install the 0.9.10-3.fc17 version of libvirt - it has broken packaging and was unpushed replaced by 0.9.11-1.fc17. Sadly there seems to be quite a delay in Bohdi updating F17 repos currently :-( Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o-http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
# yum install /usr/sbin/libvirtd
Error: Protected multilib versions: libvirt-client-0.9.10-2.fc17.i686 !=
libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17.x86_64
What does the error mean?
...
Or, some packager forgot to use %{?_isa} when specifying package dependencies
which are [or become] architecture-dependent. This is a common and *systematic*
error which causes much grief. None of the tools check for it, which is another
bug^Wopportunity for enhancement.
--
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: I still get this error several times a week, and I still have no idea what it means or how I'm supposed to respond to it (other than fiddling randomly with packages until it goes away). The latest one: # yum install /usr/sbin/libvirtd [... yum spew deleted ...] Error: Protected multilib versions: libvirt-client-0.9.10-2.fc17.i686 != libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17.x86_64 $ rpm -qa | grep libvirt-client libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17.x86_64 What does the error mean? You can get this when a package wants the older version of (in this case) libvirt-client and tries to pull in the i686 version to resolve the dependency when it doesn't specify a particular arch. Michael Young -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 06:32:47AM -0700, John Reiser wrote:
# yum install /usr/sbin/libvirtd
Error: Protected multilib versions: libvirt-client-0.9.10-2.fc17.i686 !=
libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17.x86_64
What does the error mean?
...
Or, some packager forgot to use %{?_isa} when specifying package
dependencies which are [or become] architecture-dependent. This is
a common and *systematic* error which causes much grief. None of
the tools check for it, which is another bug^Wopportunity for
enhancement.
Is there any information about when this should be used? I don't
think I've ever written a spec file that uses it.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
Fedora now supports 80 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#)
http://cocan.org/getting_started_with_ocaml_on_red_hat_and_fedora
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 06:54:36PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: Is there any information about when this should be used? I don't think I've ever written a spec file that uses it. I think it is whenever a package containing a library (i.e. a multilib package) is required via the package's name, then it needs to be used due to multilib. Btw. is there an easy way to get a list of all packages that are multilib? Regards Till -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 06:32:47AM -0700, John Reiser wrote:
# yum install /usr/sbin/libvirtd
Error: Protected multilib versions: libvirt-client-0.9.10-2.fc17.i686 !=
libvirt-client-0.9.10-3.fc17.x86_64
What does the error mean?
...
Or, some packager forgot to use %{?_isa} when specifying package
dependencies which are [or become] architecture-dependent. This is
a common and *systematic* error which causes much grief. None of
the tools check for it, which is another bug^Wopportunity for
enhancement.
Is there any information about when this should be used? I don't
think I've ever written a spec file that uses it.
The packaging guidelines describe several cases, search for arch-specific.
Mirek
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Repost] What is Error: Protected multilib versions
John Reiser wrote:
Or, some packager forgot to use %{?_isa} when specifying package
dependencies which are [or become] architecture-dependent. This is a
common and systematic error which causes much grief. None of the tools
check for it, which is another bug^Wopportunity for enhancement.
%{?_isa} wouldn't really fix this. It'd just change the error from
protected multilib versions to unresolvable dependencies. The real issue
is that the repository contains packages with broken dependencies, and
there's no magic bullet to fix that in yum or in the packaging. There is,
however, talk about enforcing the AutoQA dependency checks on the Bodhi end,
which should fix that problem in most cases.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
What is Error: Protected multilib versions: ...?
I get this error all the time, but I can't find a coherent explanation for what it means. What is the precise meaning of the protected multilib versions error? # yum install /lib/ld-linux.so.2 [...] Error: Protected multilib versions: glibc-2.14.90-4.i686 != glibc-2.14.90-1.x86_64 # yum install /lib/ld-linux.so.2 glibc-2.14.90-4.x86_64 Loaded plugins: auto-update-debuginfo, presto, refresh-packagekit Setting up Install Process Package glibc-2.14.90-4.x86_64 already installed and latest version Resolving Dependencies -- Running transaction check --- Package glibc.i686 0:2.14.90-4 will be installed -- Processing Dependency: libfreebl3.so for package: glibc-2.14.90-4.i686 -- Processing Dependency: libfreebl3.so(NSSRAWHASH_3.12.3) for package: glibc-2.14.90-4.i686 -- Running transaction check --- Package nss-softokn-freebl.i686 0:3.12.10-4.fc16 will be installed -- Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Protected multilib versions: glibc-2.14.90-4.i686 != glibc-2.14.90-1.x86_64 # yum install glibc-2.14.90-4.x86_64 Loaded plugins: auto-update-debuginfo, presto, refresh-packagekit Setting up Install Process Package glibc-2.14.90-4.x86_64 already installed and latest version Nothing to do Bonus question. How come rpm/yum has allowed me to install multiple different versions of glibc? (I have never knowingly forced any installation on this machine). # rpm -qa | grep glibc glibc-utils-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-2.14.90-1.x86_64 glibc-headers-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-debuginfo-common-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-static-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-debuginfo-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-devel-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-debuginfo-common-2.14-2.x86_64 glibc-common-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-common-2.14.90-1.x86_64 Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones libguestfs lets you edit virtual machines. Supports shell scripting, bindings from many languages. http://libguestfs.org -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: What is Error: Protected multilib versions: ...?
And now to the list as well... On 4 Sep 2011 10:01, Niels de Vos ni...@nixpanic.net wrote: On 4 Sep 2011 09:45, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote: I get this error all the time, but I can't find a coherent explanation for what it means. What is the precise meaning of the protected multilib versions error? # yum install /lib/ld-linux.so.2 [...] Error: Protected multilib versions: glibc-2.14.90-4.i686 != glibc-2.14.90-1.x86_64 # yum install /lib/ld-linux.so.2 glibc-2.14.90-4.x86_64 Loaded plugins: auto-update-debuginfo, presto, refresh-packagekit Setting up Install Process Package glibc-2.14.90-4.x86_64 already installed and latest version Resolving Dependencies -- Running transaction check --- Package glibc.i686 0:2.14.90-4 will be installed -- Processing Dependency: libfreebl3.so for package: glibc-2.14.90-4.i686 -- Processing Dependency: libfreebl3.so(NSSRAWHASH_3.12.3) for package: glibc-2.14.90-4.i686 -- Running transaction check --- Package nss-softokn-freebl.i686 0:3.12.10-4.fc16 will be installed -- Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Protected multilib versions: glibc-2.14.90-4.i686 != glibc-2.14.90-1.x86_64 # yum install glibc-2.14.90-4.x86_64 Loaded plugins: auto-update-debuginfo, presto, refresh-packagekit Setting up Install Process Package glibc-2.14.90-4.x86_64 already installed and latest version Nothing to do Bonus question. How come rpm/yum has allowed me to install multiple different versions of glibc? (I have never knowingly forced any installation on this machine). # rpm -qa | grep glibc glibc-utils-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-2.14.90-1.x86_64 glibc-headers-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-debuginfo-common-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-static-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-debuginfo-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-devel-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-debuginfo-common-2.14-2.x86_64 glibc-common-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-common-2.14.90-1.x86_64 It seems that you have 2x glibc.x86_64, not a 32-bit one. Likely some previous update was interrupted and never finished? yum-complete-transaction or similar might be able to help you here. Hth, Niels Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones libguestfs lets you edit virtual machines. Supports shell scripting, bindings from many languages. http://libguestfs.org -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: What is Error: Protected multilib versions: ...?
Richard W.M. Jones writes: glibc-common-2.14.90-4.x86_64 glibc-common-2.14.90-1.x86_64 This means that rpm/yum aborted in a middle of a upgrade. You should clean this up using rpm -e glibc-common-2.14.90-1.x86_64 pgpf62s8f7GEk.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
