FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 05-29-2010, 04:57 AM
Ralf Corsepius
 
Default FC13 nss-softokn-freebl update issues

Hi,

ATM, I am observing this:

# repoquery -qa 'nss-softokn-freebl*'
nss-softokn-freebl-0:3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64
nss-softokn-freebl-0:3.12.4-17.fc13.i686
nss-softokn-freebl-devel-0:3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64
nss-softokn-freebl-devel-0:3.12.4-19.fc13.i686

http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/updates/13/x86_64/nss-softokn-freebl-0:3.12.4-19.fc13.i686.rpm

exists, but yum's primary* doesn't seem to contain it:

zcat
4bcc071c3c3a7ca4116f222b62c7e01774a98b32244cf0a732 45437ac7579f23-primary.xml.gz
| grep nss-softokn-freebl | grep href
<location href="nss-softokn-freebl-devel-3.12.4-19.fc13.i686.rpm"/>
<location href="nss-softokn-freebl-3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64.rpm"/>
<location href="nss-softokn-freebl-devel-3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64.rpm"/>

Seems as a bogusly "blacklisted i686" package to me.

The problem with this:
glibc2.i686 requires nss-softokn-freebl


Ralf
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 05-29-2010, 08:48 AM
Jonathan Underwood
 
Default FC13 nss-softokn-freebl update issues

On 29 May 2010 05:57, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@freenet.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ATM, I am observing this:
>
> # repoquery -qa *'nss-softokn-freebl*'
> nss-softokn-freebl-0:3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64
> nss-softokn-freebl-0:3.12.4-17.fc13.i686
> nss-softokn-freebl-devel-0:3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64
> nss-softokn-freebl-devel-0:3.12.4-19.fc13.i686
>
> http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/updates/13/x86_64/nss-softokn-freebl-0:3.12.4-19.fc13.i686.rpm
>
> exists, but yum's primary* doesn't seem to contain it:
>
> zcat
> 4bcc071c3c3a7ca4116f222b62c7e01774a98b32244cf0a732 45437ac7579f23-primary.xml.gz
> | grep nss-softokn-freebl | grep href
> <location href="nss-softokn-freebl-devel-3.12.4-19.fc13.i686.rpm"/>
> <location href="nss-softokn-freebl-3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64.rpm"/>
> <location href="nss-softokn-freebl-devel-3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64.rpm"/>
>
> Seems as a bogusly "blacklisted i686" package to me.
>
> The problem with this:
> glibc2.i686 requires nss-softokn-freebl

Something else a bit weird, not sure if it's related:

# yum check all
Loaded plugins: presto, refresh-packagekit
nss-softokn-3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64 is a duplicate with
nss-softokn-3.12.4-17.fc13.i686
nss-softokn-freebl-3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64 is a duplicate with
nss-softokn-freebl-3.12.4-17.fc13.i686
Error: check all
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 05-30-2010, 06:32 PM
Elio Maldonado
 
Default FC13 nss-softokn-freebl update issues

Not sure but I strongly suspect a change made to nss.spec to be the cause.
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596840#c7

Elio



----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan Underwood" <jonathan.underwood@gmail.com>
To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>
Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 1:48:38 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: FC13 nss-softokn-freebl update issues

On 29 May 2010 05:57, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@freenet.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ATM, I am observing this:
>
> # repoquery -qa *'nss-softokn-freebl*'
> nss-softokn-freebl-0:3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64
> nss-softokn-freebl-0:3.12.4-17.fc13.i686
> nss-softokn-freebl-devel-0:3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64
> nss-softokn-freebl-devel-0:3.12.4-19.fc13.i686
>
> http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/updates/13/x86_64/nss-softokn-freebl-0:3.12.4-19.fc13.i686.rpm
>
> exists, but yum's primary* doesn't seem to contain it:
>
> zcat
> 4bcc071c3c3a7ca4116f222b62c7e01774a98b32244cf0a732 45437ac7579f23-primary.xml.gz
> | grep nss-softokn-freebl | grep href
> <location href="nss-softokn-freebl-devel-3.12.4-19.fc13.i686.rpm"/>
> <location href="nss-softokn-freebl-3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64.rpm"/>
> <location href="nss-softokn-freebl-devel-3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64.rpm"/>
>
> Seems as a bogusly "blacklisted i686" package to me.
>
> The problem with this:
> glibc2.i686 requires nss-softokn-freebl

Something else a bit weird, not sure if it's related:

# yum check all
Loaded plugins: presto, refresh-packagekit
nss-softokn-3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64 is a duplicate with
nss-softokn-3.12.4-17.fc13.i686
nss-softokn-freebl-3.12.4-19.fc13.x86_64 is a duplicate with
nss-softokn-freebl-3.12.4-17.fc13.i686
Error: check all
--
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
 
Old 06-01-2010, 06:48 PM
Bill Nottingham
 
Default FC13 nss-softokn-freebl update issues

Elio Maldonado (emaldona@redhat.com) said:
> Not sure but I strongly suspect a change made to nss.spec to be the cause.
> See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596840#c7

It's due to the fact that nss-softokn-freebl (actually, *all* the nss/nspr
libraires) do not fit the normal library naming, so it's not explicitly pulled for
multilib. For any update or release set that's composed with a package that explicitly
requires a compat arch of nss-softokn-freebl (such as glibc, libpurple,
pam_pkcs11, etc.), it will get pulled in via dependency resolution. F-13
updates has none of these, so it doesn't.

We could add some hacks to mash to get it pulled in, but I must ask...
why do all the NSS/NSPR libraries version their libraries in the library
name instead of the so version (i.e., libfreebl3.so instead of
libfreebl.so.3)?

Bill
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 06-01-2010, 08:32 PM
Elio Maldonado
 
Default FC13 nss-softokn-freebl update issues

I don't know when the 3 suffix was added. It may have been due to versioning at some time but if I recall correctly we keep the 3 suffix to avoid a name class with with the other nss package (name switch service I believe). Bob or Kai can set me straight on this matter.

Another thing that puzzles me if that this is a problem on F-13 but not on F-12. See comments in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596840


Elio

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Nottingham" <notting@redhat.com>
To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 1, 2010 11:48:41 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: FC13 nss-softokn-freebl update issues

Elio Maldonado (emaldona@redhat.com) said:
> Not sure but I strongly suspect a change made to nss.spec to be the cause.
> See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596840#c7

It's due to the fact that nss-softokn-freebl (actually, *all* the nss/nspr
libraires) do not fit the normal library naming, so it's not explicitly pulled for
multilib. For any update or release set that's composed with a package that explicitly
requires a compat arch of nss-softokn-freebl (such as glibc, libpurple,
pam_pkcs11, etc.), it will get pulled in via dependency resolution. F-13
updates has none of these, so it doesn't.

We could add some hacks to mash to get it pulled in, but I must ask...
why do all the NSS/NSPR libraries version their libraries in the library
name instead of the so version (i.e., libfreebl3.so instead of
libfreebl.so.3)?

Bill
--
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
 
Old 06-01-2010, 09:11 PM
Bill Nottingham
 
Default FC13 nss-softokn-freebl update issues

Elio Maldonado (emaldona@redhat.com) said:
> I don't know when the 3 suffix was added. It may have been due to versioning at some time but if I recall correctly we keep the 3 suffix to avoid a name class with with the other nss package (name switch service I believe). Bob or Kai can set me straight on this matter.
>
> Another thing that puzzles me if that this is a problem on F-13 but not on F-12. See comments in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596840

As I said...

> For any update or release set that's composed with a package that explicitly
> requires a compat arch of nss-softokn-freebl (such as glibc, libpurple,
> pam_pkcs11, etc.), it will get pulled in via dependency resolution. F-13
> updates has none of these, so it doesn't.

Both glibc and libpurple updates exist in F-12 updates.

Bill
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 06-01-2010, 09:24 PM
Elio Maldonado
 
Default FC13 nss-softokn-freebl update issues

Bill,

Getting back to
>> (i.e., libfreebl3.so instead of libfreebl.so.3)?

No danger of the name class I alluded for nss but we still want to preserve the names so as not to break other dependent packages. I wonder if aliases may help in any way. If we were to add, via the spec file, libfreebl.so.3 as an alias to libfreebl3.so (and similarly with libnssdmb3.so and linsoftoken3.so), would that help?

Elio


----- Original Message -----
From: "Elio Maldonado" <emaldona@redhat.com>
To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>, "Robert Relyea" <rrelyea@redhat.com>, "Kai Engert" <kengert@redhat.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 1, 2010 1:32:43 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: FC13 nss-softokn-freebl update issues

I don't know when the 3 suffix was added. It may have been due to versioning at some time but if I recall correctly we keep the 3 suffix to avoid a name class with with the other nss package (name switch service I believe). Bob or Kai can set me straight on this matter.

Another thing that puzzles me if that this is a problem on F-13 but not on F-12. See comments in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596840


Elio

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Nottingham" <notting@redhat.com>
To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 1, 2010 11:48:41 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: FC13 nss-softokn-freebl update issues

Elio Maldonado (emaldona@redhat.com) said:
> Not sure but I strongly suspect a change made to nss.spec to be the cause.
> See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596840#c7

It's due to the fact that nss-softokn-freebl (actually, *all* the nss/nspr
libraires) do not fit the normal library naming, so it's not explicitly pulled for
multilib. For any update or release set that's composed with a package that explicitly
requires a compat arch of nss-softokn-freebl (such as glibc, libpurple,
pam_pkcs11, etc.), it will get pulled in via dependency resolution. F-13
updates has none of these, so it doesn't.

We could add some hacks to mash to get it pulled in, but I must ask...
why do all the NSS/NSPR libraries version their libraries in the library
name instead of the so version (i.e., libfreebl3.so instead of
libfreebl.so.3)?

Bill
--
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
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 06-01-2010, 09:48 PM
Bill Nottingham
 
Default FC13 nss-softokn-freebl update issues

Elio Maldonado (emaldona@redhat.com) said:
> Getting back to
> >> (i.e., libfreebl3.so instead of libfreebl.so.3)?
>
> No danger of the name class I alluded for nss but we still want to preserve the names so as not to break other dependent packages. I wonder if aliases may help in any way. If we were to add, via the spec file, libfreebl.so.3 as an alias to libfreebl3.so (and similarly with libnssdmb3.so and linsoftoken3.so), would that help?

I'm not sure it would really *help*, as it might cause confusion as some app
would think that's the actual soname. I'm mainly curious as to the history
of how the libraries ended up that way.

Bill
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 06-02-2010, 07:06 PM
Robert Relyea
 
Default FC13 nss-softokn-freebl update issues

On 06/01/2010 11:48 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Elio Maldonado (emaldona@redhat.com) said:
>
>> Not sure but I strongly suspect a change made to nss.spec to be the cause.
>> See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596840#c7
>>
> It's due to the fact that nss-softokn-freebl (actually, *all* the nss/nspr
> libraires) do not fit the normal library naming, so it's not explicitly pulled for
> multilib. For any update or release set that's composed with a package that explicitly
> requires a compat arch of nss-softokn-freebl (such as glibc, libpurple,
> pam_pkcs11, etc.), it will get pulled in via dependency resolution. F-13
> updates has none of these, so it doesn't.
>
> We could add some hacks to mash to get it pulled in, but I must ask...
> why do all the NSS/NSPR libraries version their libraries in the library
> name instead of the so version (i.e., libfreebl3.so instead of
> libfreebl.so.3)?
>
Because upstream selected it's names before linux naming was anything
like widespread.

nss/nspr upstream was also unusual in considering binary compatibility
breakage a sev 1 bug. It's expected that old apps run against new versions.

One good side effect of this is there is no name colision in the
libraries between Network Security Services and Name Switch Select, nor
NSS's libssl3.so and openssl's libssl.so.

bob


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 06-02-2010, 07:51 PM
Bill Nottingham
 
Default FC13 nss-softokn-freebl update issues

Robert Relyea (rrelyea@redhat.com) said:
> > It's due to the fact that nss-softokn-freebl (actually, *all* the nss/nspr
> > libraires) do not fit the normal library naming, so it's not explicitly pulled for
> > multilib. For any update or release set that's composed with a package that explicitly
> > requires a compat arch of nss-softokn-freebl (such as glibc, libpurple,
> > pam_pkcs11, etc.), it will get pulled in via dependency resolution. F-13
> > updates has none of these, so it doesn't.
> >
> > We could add some hacks to mash to get it pulled in, but I must ask...
> > why do all the NSS/NSPR libraries version their libraries in the library
> > name instead of the so version (i.e., libfreebl3.so instead of
> > libfreebl.so.3)?
> >
> Because upstream selected it's names before linux naming was anything
> like widespread.
>
> nss/nspr upstream was also unusual in considering binary compatibility
> breakage a sev 1 bug. It's expected that old apps run against new versions.
>
> One good side effect of this is there is no name colision in the
> libraries between Network Security Services and Name Switch Select, nor
> NSS's libssl3.so and openssl's libssl.so.

OK. Copying from the bug:

There are two 'simple' fixes for this that don't involve hotfixing the push
infrastructure:

1) For all nss/nspr packages that don't have .so symlinks in their devel
packages, add %{?_isa} to the requires in the devel packages.

See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/ArchSpecificRequires for
a packaging draft for this.

For example, that would change, in nss-softokn-freebl-devel:

Requires: nss-softokn-freebl = %{version}-%{release}
to:
Requires: nss-softokn-freebl%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}

in nss-softokn-freebl-devel,

Requires: nss-softokn = %{version}-%{release}
to
Requires: nss-softokn%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}

in nss-softokn-devel, and so on.

The reason this is needed is that for most -devel pacakges, there is automatic
dependencies added on the proper library package due to following the '.so'
devel symlink to the main library. This doesn't work for nss/nspr, as the
-devel packages don't have these symlinks.

2) Wait for either of https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glibc-2.12-2 or
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pidgin-2.7.1-2.fc13 to be pushed to
stable, as those will pull in the i686 nss-softokn-freebl through library
dependencies.

Bill
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 06:16 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org