5:12 a.m.
currently on a x86_64 system distro-sync to F19 is broken
i saw the same in F18 with updates-testing enabled on
a machine with i686 packages some days ago and download
the openssl packages for both archs from koji and
doing a "yum localupdate" worked fine
Error: Package: 1:openssl-1.0.1e-29.fc18.i686 (@/openssl-1.0.1e-29.fc18.i686/18)
Requires: openssl-libs(x86-32) = 1:1.0.1e-29.fc18
Removing: 1:openssl-libs-1.0.1e-29.fc18.i686
(@/openssl-libs-1.0.1e-29.fc18.i686/18)
openssl-libs(x86-32) = 1:1.0.1e-29.fc18
Updated By: 1:openssl-libs-1.0.1e-30.fc19.i686 (updates)
openssl-libs(x86-32) = 1:1.0.1e-30.fc19
Available: 1:openssl-libs-1.0.1e-4.fc19.i686 (fedora)
openssl-libs(x86-32) = 1:1.0.1e-4.fc19
7:49 a.m.
On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 11:12:41 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
currently on a x86_64 system distro-sync to F19 is broken
i saw the same in F18 with updates-testing enabled on
a machine with i686 packages some days ago and download
the openssl packages for both archs from koji and
doing a "yum localupdate" worked fine
Error: Package: 1:openssl-1.0.1e-29.fc18.i686 (@/openssl-1.0.1e-29.fc18.i686/18)
Where did you find openssl.i686 in the x86_64 repos?
Did you download it from koji? The repo id in brackets is suspicious.
Here is only openssl.x86_64 release -30.fc18:
http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/updates/testing/18/x86_64/
Here is only openssl.x86_64 release -28.fc18:
http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/updates/18/x86_64/
It seems to me the openssl base package is not pulled in by the multilib
composer (because openssl-devel only requires openssl-libs).
7:56 a.m.
Am 31.10.2013 13:49, schrieb Michael Schwendt:
On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 11:12:41 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> currently on a x86_64 system distro-sync to F19 is broken
> i saw the same in F18 with updates-testing enabled on
> a machine with i686 packages some days ago and download
> the openssl packages for both archs from koji and
> doing a "yum localupdate" worked fine
>
> Error: Package: 1:openssl-1.0.1e-29.fc18.i686 (@/openssl-1.0.1e-29.fc18.i686/18)
Where did you find openssl.i686 in the x86_64 repos?
Did you download it from koji? The repo id in brackets is suspicious.
Here is only openssl.x86_64 release -30.fc18:
http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/updates/testing/18/x86_64/
Here is only openssl.x86_64 release -28.fc18:
http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/updates/18/x86_64/
yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update openssl\* did not work because
different versions for x86_64 and i686 and so i downloaded it from koji
It seems to me the openssl base package is not pulled in by the
multilib
composer (because openssl-devel only requires openssl-libs)
but skype or whatever pulls dependencies
10:14 a.m.
On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 13:56:53 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> currently on a x86_64 system distro-sync to F19 is broken
>> i saw the same in F18 with updates-testing enabled on
>> a machine with i686 packages some days ago and download
>> the openssl packages for both archs from koji and
>> doing a "yum localupdate" worked fine
>>
>> Error: Package: 1:openssl-1.0.1e-29.fc18.i686
(@/openssl-1.0.1e-29.fc18.i686/18)
>
> Where did you find openssl.i686 in the x86_64 repos?
> Did you download it from koji? The repo id in brackets is suspicious.
>
> Here is only openssl.x86_64 release -30.fc18:
> http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/updates/testing/18/x86_64/
>
> Here is only openssl.x86_64 release -28.fc18:
> http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/updates/18/x86_64/
yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update openssl\* did not work because
different versions for x86_64 and i686 and so i downloaded it from koji
Why did you have openssl.i686 installed on x86_64 to begin with?
You have messed up your installation. :-(
Have you use rpm -Uvh instead of rpm -Fvh? Or why have you installed
openssl.i686?
> It seems to me the openssl base package is not pulled in by the
multilib
> composer (because openssl-devel only requires openssl-libs)
but skype or whatever pulls dependencies
Skype is not included with Fedora. Skype does not (and cannot) influence
which packages are multilib'ed when the repos are composed. Skype 32-bit
doesn't depend on "openssl". What on your machine depends on 32-bit
"openssl"
and not "openssl-libs"?
10:29 a.m.
Am 31.10.2013 16:14, schrieb Michael Schwendt:
On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 13:56:53 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>> currently on a x86_64 system distro-sync to F19 is broken
>>> i saw the same in F18 with updates-testing enabled on
>>> a machine with i686 packages some days ago and download
>>> the openssl packages for both archs from koji and
>>> doing a "yum localupdate" worked fine
>>>
>>> Error: Package: 1:openssl-1.0.1e-29.fc18.i686
(@/openssl-1.0.1e-29.fc18.i686/18)
>>
>> Where did you find openssl.i686 in the x86_64 repos?
>> Did you download it from koji? The repo id in brackets is suspicious.
>>
>> Here is only openssl.x86_64 release -30.fc18:
>> http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/updates/testing/18/x86_64/
>>
>> Here is only openssl.x86_64 release -28.fc18:
>> http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/updates/18/x86_64/
>
> yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update openssl\* did not work because
> different versions for x86_64 and i686 and so i downloaded it from koji
Why did you have openssl.i686 installed on x86_64 to begin with?
You have messed up your installation. :-(
Have you use rpm -Uvh instead of rpm -Fvh? Or why have you installed
openssl.i686?
the machine has a long history
>> It seems to me the openssl base package is not pulled in by
the multilib
>> composer (because openssl-devel only requires openssl-libs)
>
> but skype or whatever pulls dependencies
Skype is not included with Fedora. Skype does not (and cannot) influence
which packages are multilib'ed when the repos are composed. Skype 32-bit
doesn't depend on "openssl". What on your machine depends on 32-bit
"openssl"
and not "openssl-libs"?
i was the impression that in such cases all or nothing should be x86_64 and i686
or at least if both can be installed parallel they are also updated clean
11:27 a.m.
On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 16:29:18 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Why did you have openssl.i686 installed on x86_64 to begin
with?
> You have messed up your installation. :-(
> Have you use rpm -Uvh instead of rpm -Fvh? Or why have you installed
> openssl.i686?
the machine has a long history
Well, then it needs to be cleaned up from time to time.
"yum list extras" as well as "package-cleanup --orphans" on an
up-to-date
installation shows all packages, which are not available in the enabled
repos anymore. If you store everything you install directly via "rpm" in
a local repo, you can keep track of packages that have been dropped by
Fedora. Such as openssl.i686 for x86_64.
> Skype is not included with Fedora. Skype does not (and cannot)
influence
> which packages are multilib'ed when the repos are composed. Skype 32-bit
> doesn't depend on "openssl". What on your machine depends on 32-bit
"openssl"
> and not "openssl-libs"?
i was the impression that in such cases all or nothing should be x86_64 and i686
or at least if both can be installed parallel they are also updated clean
Download "mash" src.rpm and examine it. The basic multilib repo compose
strategy is to make merge all *-devel packages and their dependencies plus
a few packages from a whitelist. It has been like that since Fedora Extras.
Typically, openssl-devel requires openssl-libs, and if the "openssl" base
package is not on the whitelist, something else would need to require it
arch-specific. No i686 pkg in the x86_64 repo does currently:
# repoquery --exactdeps --whatrequires 'openssl(x86-32)'
#
# repoquery --exactdeps --whatrequires 'openssl(x86-64)'
openssl-perl-1:1.0.1e-22.fc20.x86_64
openssl-perl-1:1.0.1e-29.fc20.x86_64
# repoquery --exactdeps --whatrequires openssl|wc -l
73
12:26 p.m.
Am 31.10.2013 17:27, schrieb Michael Schwendt:
On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 16:29:18 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> Why did you have openssl.i686 installed on x86_64 to begin with?
>> You have messed up your installation. :-(
>> Have you use rpm -Uvh instead of rpm -Fvh? Or why have you installed
>> openssl.i686?
>
> the machine has a long history
Well, then it needs to be cleaned up from time to time.
until today i thought it is as clean as possible because
a self-maintained meta-package and anything which get
listed by "package-cleanup --leaves --all" is removed
but sadly you can't do "Requires: package.x86_64" explicitly
this way and so "Requires: openssl" catched both
"yum list extras" as well as "package-cleanup
--orphans" on an up-to-date
installation shows all packages, which are not available in the enabled
repos anymore. If you store everything you install directly via "rpm" in
a local repo, you can keep track of packages that have been dropped by
Fedora. Such as openssl.i686 for x86_64.
> i was the impression that in such cases all or nothing should be x86_64 and i686
> or at least if both can be installed parallel they are also updated clean
Download "mash" src.rpm and examine it. The basic multilib repo compose
strategy is to make merge all *-devel packages and their dependencies plus
a few packages from a whitelist. It has been like that since Fedora Extras.
Typically, openssl-devel requires openssl-libs, and if the "openssl" base
package is not on the whitelist, something else would need to require it
arch-specific. No i686 pkg in the x86_64 repo does currently:
# repoquery --exactdeps --whatrequires 'openssl(x86-32)'
#
# repoquery --exactdeps --whatrequires 'openssl(x86-64)'
openssl-perl-1:1.0.1e-22.fc20.x86_64
openssl-perl-1:1.0.1e-29.fc20.x86_64
# repoquery --exactdeps --whatrequires openssl|wc -l
thank you for that worthful input!
10:08 p.m.
Reindl Harald wrote:
but sadly you can't do "Requires: package.x86_64"
explicitly
You can actually:
Requires: openssl(x86-64)
See also the %{_isa} macro.
http://www.rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/ArchDependencies
(This is also what Michael Schwendt's repoquery invocation in this thread
checked for.)
"Requires: openssl" catched both
And to fix this broken behavior, set exactarch=1 in yum.conf. This is the
default for fresh installs of current versions of Fedora, but some old
releases defaulted to exactarch=0.
Kevin Kofler
2:44 p.m.
Am 01.11.2013 04:08, schrieb Kevin Kofler:
Reindl Harald wrote:
> but sadly you can't do "Requires: package.x86_64" explicitly
You can actually:
Requires: openssl(x86-64)
See also the %{_isa} macro
you can't, been there done that in trying to list i686 packages
"Requires: openssl-libs(i686)" results in unsolveable deps
3:02 p.m.
On 11/15/2013 10:44 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 01.11.2013 04:08, schrieb Kevin Kofler:
> Reindl Harald wrote:
>> but sadly you can't do "Requires: package.x86_64" explicitly
>
> You can actually:
> Requires: openssl(x86-64)
> See also the %{_isa} macro
you can't, been there done that in trying to list i686 packages
"Requires: openssl-libs(i686)" results in unsolveable deps
%{_isa} != %{_arch}, very much on purpose. See
http://rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/ArchDependencies
- Panu -
11:10 a.m.
Michael Schwendt <mschwendt <at> gmail.com> writes:
Skype is not included with Fedora. Skype does not (and cannot)
influence
which packages are multilib'ed when the repos are composed. Skype 32-bit
doesn't depend on "openssl". What on your machine depends on 32-bit
"openssl"
and not "openssl-libs"?
In F16, when I had 32-bit packages (namely Skype and Fedora's wine)
installed, I had both openssl.i686 and openssl.x86_64 installed, so
openssl.i686 is pulled in, directly or indirectly, by either Skype or wine.
It's easy to find out which one by trying to remove openssl.i686 to see what
it wants to remove with it.
11:32 a.m.
On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 16:10:02 +0000 (UTC), Andre Robatino wrote:
In F16, when I had 32-bit packages (namely Skype and Fedora's
wine)
installed, I had both openssl.i686 and openssl.x86_64 installed, so
Indeed. Up to F17, but not anymore since F18:
http://archives.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux/updates/17/x86...
http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/updates/18/x86_64/
openssl.i686 is pulled in, directly or indirectly, by either Skype or
wine.
It's easy to find out which one by trying to remove openssl.i686 to see what
it wants to remove with it.
The 32-bit Skype rpm (for F16?) doesn't depend on "openssl".
But watch this on F20 x86_64:
# repoquery --releasever=17 --exactdeps --whatrequires 'openssl(x86-32)'
openssl-devel-1:1.0.0i-1.fc17.i686
openssl-devel-1:1.0.0k-1.fc17.i686
So, openssl-devel.i686 required openssl.i686 directly.
There have been packaging changes/fixes related to that.
11:33 a.m.
On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 17:32 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
But watch this on F20 x86_64:
# repoquery --releasever=17 --exactdeps --whatrequires 'openssl(x86-32)'
openssl-devel-1:1.0.0i-1.fc17.i686
openssl-devel-1:1.0.0k-1.fc17.i686
So, openssl-devel.i686 required openssl.i686 directly.
There have been packaging changes/fixes related to that.
Yes, at some point openssl-libs was split out of openssl.
--
Mathieu
2:41 p.m.
Am 31.10.2013 16:14, schrieb Michael Schwendt:
On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 13:56:53 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>> currently on a x86_64 system distro-sync to F19 is broken
>>> i saw the same in F18 with updates-testing enabled on
>>> a machine with i686 packages some days ago and download
>>> the openssl packages for both archs from koji and
>>> doing a "yum localupdate" worked fine
>>>
>>> Error: Package: 1:openssl-1.0.1e-29.fc18.i686
(@/openssl-1.0.1e-29.fc18.i686/18)
>>
>> Where did you find openssl.i686 in the x86_64 repos?
>> Did you download it from koji? The repo id in brackets is suspicious.
>>
>> Here is only openssl.x86_64 release -30.fc18:
>> http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/updates/testing/18/x86_64/
>>
>> Here is only openssl.x86_64 release -28.fc18:
>> http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/updates/18/x86_64/
>
> yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update openssl\* did not work because
> different versions for x86_64 and i686 and so i downloaded it from koji
Why did you have openssl.i686 installed on x86_64 to begin with?
You have messed up your installation. :-(
Have you use rpm -Uvh instead of rpm -Fvh? Or why have you installed
openssl.i686?
because "yum update *.rpm" from a local folder is broken if you download
all the x86_64 and i686 packages from koji to a local folder resulting
in not only update the instaleld ones and installs the not required
i686 packages too which i would expect from "rpm -Uvh" but not a yum
localupdate
4:29 p.m.
On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 21:41:11 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update openssl\* did not
work because
>> different versions for x86_64 and i686 and so i downloaded it from koji
>
> Why did you have openssl.i686 installed on x86_64 to begin with?
> You have messed up your installation. :-(
> Have you use rpm -Uvh instead of rpm -Fvh? Or why have you installed
> openssl.i686?
because "yum update *.rpm" from a local folder is broken if you download
all the x86_64 and i686 packages from koji to a local folder resulting
in not only update the instaleld ones and installs the not required
i686 packages too which i would expect from "rpm -Uvh" but not a yum
localupdate
That sounds like a bug indeed. "man yum" for the "localupdate" command
(deprecated)
explains that Yum will only update the specified rpm files, if an older version
is already installed. It points out that the "update" command does the same.
# yum update openssl-libs-1.0.1e-31.fc21.i686.rpm
Loaded plugins: auto-update-debuginfo, langpacks, refresh-packagekit
Examining openssl-libs-1.0.1e-31.fc21.i686.rpm: 1:openssl-libs-1.0.1e-31.fc21.i686
Package openssl-libs.i686 not installed, cannot update it. Run yum install to install it
instead.
No packages marked for update
That doesn't work in all cases. It even marks the i686 rpm as an update for
the installed x86_64 package:
# yum localupdate openssl-libs-1.0.1e-33.fc21.i686.rpm
openssl-libs-1.0.1e-33.fc21.x86_64.rpm
Loaded plugins: auto-update-debuginfo, langpacks, refresh-packagekit
Examining openssl-libs-1.0.1e-33.fc21.i686.rpm: 1:openssl-libs-1.0.1e-33.fc21.i686
Marking openssl-libs-1.0.1e-33.fc21.i686.rpm as an update to
1:openssl-libs-1.0.1e-31.fc21.x86_64
(!)
Examining openssl-libs-1.0.1e-33.fc21.x86_64.rpm: 1:openssl-libs-1.0.1e-33.fc21.x86_64
Marking openssl-libs-1.0.1e-33.fc21.x86_64.rpm as an update to
1:openssl-libs-1.0.1e-31.fc21.x86_64
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
[...]
Or:
# yum localupdate openssl-libs-1.0.1e-33.fc21.i686.rpm
Loaded plugins: auto-update-debuginfo, langpacks, refresh-packagekit
Examining openssl-libs-1.0.1e-33.fc21.i686.rpm: 1:openssl-libs-1.0.1e-33.fc21.i686
Marking openssl-libs-1.0.1e-33.fc21.i686.rpm as an update to
1:openssl-libs-1.0.1e-31.fc21.x86_64
(!)
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
So, this is highly unsafe to use with a downloaded set of mixed arch rpm files.
3812
days inactive
3827
days old
14 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Andre Robatino -
Kevin Kofler -
Mathieu Bridon -
Michael Schwendt -
Panu Matilainen -
Reindl Harald