On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 19:05:35 -0600 Orion Poplawski <orion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 08/26/2015 05:04 PM, Tim Flink wrote: > > On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 14:34:14 -0600 > > Orion Poplawski <orion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/libwps-0.4.1-1.fc21 > >> > >> depcheck libwps-0.4.1-1.fc21(x86_64) > >> a day ago > >> > >> shows passed: > >> > >> TAP version 13 > >> 1..1 > >> ok - depcheck for Koji build libwps-0.4.1-1.fc21 > >> --- > >> arch: x86_64 > >> item: libwps-0.4.1-1.fc21 > >> outcome: PASSED > >> type: koji_build > >> ... > >> > >> But: > >> > >> Error: Package: 1:libreoffice-calc-4.3.7.2-9.fc21.x86_64 > >> (@updates-testing) Requires: libwps-0.3.so.3()(64bit) > >> Removing: libwps-0.3.1-1.fc21.x86_64 > >> (@fedora-21-updates-x86_64) libwps-0.3.so.3()(64bit) > >> Updated By: libwps-0.4.1-1.fc21.x86_64 > >> (updates-testing) ~libwps-0.4.so.4()(64bit) > >> Available: libwps-0.3.0-3.fc21.x86_64 (fedora) > >> libwps-0.3.so.3()(64bit) > >> > > > > After looking into this, I'm starting to think this isn't a depcheck > > failure as much as it is a difference between yum and dnf - I assume > > that you used yum to do the attempted update to libwps-0.4? > > > > On a F21 system, if I do 'repoquery --whatrequires libwps', I get > > the following: > > > > # repoquery --whatrequires libwps > > calligra-words-0:2.8.6-1.fc21.x86_64 > > calligra-words-0:2.9.6-1.fc21.x86_64 > > libreoffice-calc-1:4.3.2.2-5.fc21.x86_64 > > libreoffice-calc-1:4.3.7.2-9.fc21.x86_64 > > libreoffice-writer-1:4.3.2.2-5.fc21.x86_64 > > libreoffice-writer-1:4.3.7.2-9.fc21.x86_64 > > libwps-devel-0:0.3.0-3.fc21.i686 > > libwps-devel-0:0.3.0-3.fc21.x86_64 > > libwps-devel-0:0.3.1-1.fc21.i686 > > libwps-devel-0:0.3.1-1.fc21.x86_64 > > libwps-tools-0:0.3.0-3.fc21.x86_64 > > libwps-tools-0:0.3.1-1.fc21.x86_64 > > writerperfect-0:0.9.2-3.fc21.x86_64 > > writerperfect-epub-0:0.9.2-3.fc21.x86_64 > > > > > > If I do the same query using dnf on a F22 system, I get: > > > > # dnf repoquery --whatrequires libwps > > Last metadata expiration check performed 1:25:08 ago on Wed Aug 26 > > 15:25:25 2015. # echo $? > > 0 > > I think that is because dnf's repoquery sucks - I believe it is only > looking for specific requires of "libwps", although I believe this is > supposed to be fixed in newer versions of dnf. A more relevant query > would either be: > > dnf repoquery --whatrequires 'libwps-0.3.so.3()(64bit)' > > or > > dnf repoquery --whatrequires --alldeps libwps > > (--alldeps being the default in the old yum based repoquery). I can't get that last one to work on my machine but the first one certainly does and I've learned something new about dnf's commands today. > > depcheck effectively uses the same depsolver that dnf uses and that > > is not the same depsolving algorithm used by yum. If dnf is fine > > installing the update, depcheck isn't going to complain. > > dnf as expected cannot update libwps either: > > [root@vmf21 ~]# dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing libwps > Using metadata from Wed Aug 26 18:54:19 2015 (0:05:58 hours old) > Dependencies resolved. > Nothing to do. > Complete! > [root@vmf21 ~]# dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing libwps --best > Using metadata from Wed Aug 26 18:54:19 2015 (0:06:06 hours old) > Error: package libreoffice-writer-1:4.3.7.2-9.fc21.x86_64 requires > libwps-0.3.so.3()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed Someone (likely me) will take a look at this in more depth. It may end up being a bug but it may end up being a missing feature, similar to a reverse dependency issue [1] that was found earlier this year. [1] https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/T482 I've created a ticket in our system to track the issue [2]. Thanks for the report - not sure we would have caught this otherwise. [2] https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/T595 Tim > > When I look into the specfile of libreoffice in the f21 branch, I > > don't actually see a Requires on libwps for fedora, just a > > BuildRequires: > > > > http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/libreoffice.git/tree/libreoffice.spec?h=f21#n209 > > > > If I'm reading the situation correctly, this isn't something that > > depcheck should or could have caught. Assuming that the libreoffice > > spec isn't missing a Requires on libwps, this likely means that > > libreoffice would be FTBFS for at least f21 with the new libwps in > > updates-testing. > > library dependencies are added automatically by rpm. > >
Attachment:
pgpWRt8WeLm3N.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
