RPM

Requires(postun) doesn't seem to have an effect on ordering package removal

Bug #638599 reported by Jeff Johnson
6
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
RPM
New
Undecided
Unassigned
Fedora
Fix Released
Medium

Bug Description

tracker

Revision history for this message
In , Caolan (caolan-redhat-bugs) wrote :

Created attachment 328463
yum log

Description of problem:

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
yum-3.2.20-8.fc11

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. yum -y erase openoffice.org-fonts openoffice.org-ure
just to remove all openoffice.org components to clear the decks
2. yum -y install openoffice.org-pdfimport
3. yum -y -v erase openoffice.org-core openoffice.org-pdfimport

Actual results:
openoffice.org-core gets erased after openoffice.org-pdfimport does, so the use of unopkg in openoffice.org-pdfimport fails as it has already been deleted

Expected results:
That the Requires(postun): openoffice.org-core would cause openoffice.org-pdfimport to be removed before openoffice.org-core

Revision history for this message
In , Caolan (caolan-redhat-bugs) wrote :

Actual results:
openoffice.org-core gets erased *before* openoffice.org-pdfimport does, so the use of unopkg in openoffice.org-pdfimport fails as it has already been deleted

Revision history for this message
In , seth (seth-redhat-bugs) wrote :

reassigning since ordering is handled by rpm.

Revision history for this message
In , Jeff (jeff-redhat-bugs) wrote :

Yes, the version of RPM you are using does not have erasure ordering implemented,
and so
      Requires(postun): openoffice.org-core
which affects the erasure ordering context, doesn't apply. Period.

What _IS_ implemented in the RPM you are using, in lieu of proper
erasure ordering, is reversed install ordering, that's __ALMOST__
gud enuf. But the Requires(postun): context marker is ignored for
reversed install ordering.

Revision history for this message
In , Caolan (caolan-redhat-bugs) wrote :

Why was the "needinfo" from me flag set ? What info is needed ?

Revision history for this message
In , seth (seth-redhat-bugs) wrote :

Caolan,
 That was my fault. I was working on a bunch of bugs at the same time and I probably hit it mistakenly.
sorry.

Revision history for this message
In , Jens (jens-redhat-bugs) wrote :

And nor does Requires(preun) for me, or even Requires?? Maybe I am missing something but this looks kind of bad to me...

Revision history for this message
In , Jens (jens-redhat-bugs) wrote :

It seems a significant change of behaviour to me. I propose it should be a F11Blocker.

Revision history for this message
In , Jeff (jeff-redhat-bugs) wrote :

The lack of erasure ordering in rpm was _ALREADY_ a FC4 blocker. Certainly, make lack of
erasure ordering a F11 ordering as you wish. In fact, the erasure ordering development
in rpm was started the day that FC4 was released, and was largely finished 7 days later.

Two (or was it three, I fergit), years ago ...

Revision history for this message
In , Bug (bug-redhat-bugs) wrote :

This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 11 development cycle.
Changing version to '11'.

More information and reason for this action is here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping

Revision history for this message
In , Jerry (jerry-redhat-bugs) wrote :

Created attachment 347957
yum log

Revision history for this message
In , Panu (panu-redhat-bugs) wrote :

This isn't a regression, erasure ordering isn't really implemented in current released rpm versions. Current rpm.org HEAD has it though, whether it'll make it to F12 is another story as its linked to some API changes that make it unsuitable for pulling into 4.7.x as is.

Revision history for this message
In , Panu (panu-redhat-bugs) wrote :

*** Bug 478842 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Revision history for this message
In , Panu (panu-redhat-bugs) wrote :

*** Bug 490975 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Revision history for this message
In , Caolan (caolan-redhat-bugs) wrote :

*** Bug 532461 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Revision history for this message
In , Panu (panu-redhat-bugs) wrote :

rpm 4.8.0-beta1 in rawhide (finally) has proper erasure ordering.

Revision history for this message
In , David (david-redhat-bugs) wrote :

*** Bug 583424 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Jeff Johnson (n3npq)
tags: added: erase fedora ordering
Changed in rpm:
milestone: none → 4.8.1
Changed in fedora:
importance: Unknown → Medium
status: Unknown → Fix Released
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.