11:07 a.m.
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Sandro Bonazzola <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Dan Kenigsberg <danken(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 10:17 AM, Sandro Bonazzola <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > 00:00:31.874 Num Packages in Repos: 22534
> > 00:00:31.875 package:
> > ovirt-provider-ovn-1.0-1.20161219125609.git.el7.centos.noarch from
> > check-custom-el7
> > 00:00:31.876 unresolved deps:
> > 00:00:31.876 python-openvswitch >= 0:2.6
> > 00:00:31.876 openvswitch-ovn-central >= 0:2.6
> > 00:00:31.876 package:
> > ovirt-provider-ovn-driver-1.0-1.20161219125609.git.el7.centos.noarch
> from
>
> It's good we have repoclosure, as it reminded us we cannot ship
> ovirt-provider-ovn unless we build and ship a version of openvswitch
> from from their master branch, at least until they ship ovs-2.7.
>
> Sandro, Marcin: can we do it? Can we supply our own build of
> openvswitch, like we did for Marcin's blog?
>
> > check-custom-el7
> > 00:00:31.876 unresolved deps:
> > 00:00:31.876 python-openvswitch >= 0:2.6
> > 00:00:31.876 openvswitch-ovn-host >= 0:2.6
> > 00:00:31.877 openvswitch >= 0:2.6
> > 00:00:31.877 package:
> > vdsm-gluster-4.18.999-1162.gite9544ovirt-provider-ovn2e.el7.centos.noarch
> from
> > check-custom-el7
> > 00:00:31.877 unresolved deps:
> > 00:00:31.877 vdsm = 0:4.18.999-1162.gite95442e.el7.centos
>
> All of these seem like repoclosure false warning.
>
> After all, vdsm = 0:4.18.999-1162.gite95442e.el7.centos is the exact
> version of vdsm that is in the repo, right?
>
can't see it in http://resources.ovirt.org/pub/ovirt-4.1-snapshot/rpm/
el7/x86_64/ while I see it in http://resources.ovirt.org/
pub/ovirt-4.1-snapshot/rpm/el7/ppc64le/
so looks like vdsm is building different version of the arch packages.
This hosuldn't happen.
Please check vdsm builders / publishers. They should deliver same version
for both arches or noarch packages will fail dependencies.
FYI,
IIRC VDSM ppc64le isn't deployed to experimental because it fails CI due to
mixing noarch pkg built by both ppc64le and x86_64, until this issue will
be resolved on VDSM side ( it was resolved by spec change and reverted )
or the ppc64le build-artifacts job should built only the ppc64le rpms and
not the noarch rpms.
Another possible option which is more complex and requires a major change
in the way we use repoman, is to keep more versions back or not using the
'only-missing' option so having a few versions of VDSM should solve it.
This doesn't affect snapshot repos AFAIK
--
Sandro Bonazzola
Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
--
Eyal Edri
Associate Manager
RHV DevOps
EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D
Red Hat Israel
phone: +972-9-7692018
irc: eedri (on #tlv #rhev-dev #rhev-integ)