devel

devel@lists.centos.org

2 participants
4652 discussions

bind rpm conflicts - centOS 8
by lejeczek 10 Feb '22

10 Feb '22

Hi guys, I did not rush with this but now after a week and some - does anybody else sees it to? Last metadata expiration check: 0:03:21 ago on Fri 04 Feb 2022 08:57:59 GMT. Error: Problem 1: package bind-dyndb-ldap-11.6-2.module_el8.5.0+750+c59b186b.x86_64 requires libdns.so.1112()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.36-2.el8.x86_64 and bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.26-6.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.36-2.el8.x86_64 and bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.26-3.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.36-2.el8.x86_64 and bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.26-4.el8_4.x86_64 - cannot install the best update candidate for package bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.26-6.el8.x86_64 - cannot install the best update candidate for package bind-dyndb-ldap-11.6-2.module_el8.5.0+750+c59b186b.x86_64 Problem 2: problem with installed package bind-dyndb-ldap-11.6-2.module_el8.5.0+750+c59b186b.x86_64 - package bind-dyndb-ldap-11.6-2.module_el8.5.0+750+c59b186b.x86_64 requires libdns.so.1112()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.36-2.el8.x86_64 and bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.26-6.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.36-2.el8.x86_64 and bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.26-3.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.36-2.el8.x86_64 and bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.26-4.el8_4.x86_64 - package bind-32:9.11.36-2.el8.x86_64 requires libdns.so.1115()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package bind-32:9.11.36-2.el8.x86_64 requires bind-libs-lite(x86-64) = 32:9.11.36-2.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package bind-32:9.11.26-6.el8.x86_64 Problem 3: package ipa-server-dns-4.9.8-2.module_el8.6.0+1053+0ac05726.noarch requires bind-dyndb-ldap >= 11.2-2, but none of the providers can be installed - package bind-dyndb-ldap-11.6-2.module_el8.5.0+750+c59b186b.x86_64 requires libdns.so.1112()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package bind-dyndb-ldap-11.6-2.module_el8.4.0+639+a88aab78.x86_64 requires libdns.so.1112()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.36-2.el8.x86_64 and bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.26-6.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.36-2.el8.x86_64 and bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.26-3.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.36-2.el8.x86_64 and bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.26-4.el8_4.x86_64 - package bind-libs-32:9.11.36-2.el8.x86_64 requires libdns.so.1115()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package bind-libs-32:9.11.36-2.el8.x86_64 requires bind-libs-lite(x86-64) = 32:9.11.36-2.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package ipa-server-dns-4.9.8-2.module_el8.6.0+1053+0ac05726.noarch - cannot install the best update candidate for package bind-libs-32:9.11.26-6.el8.x86_64 Problem 4: problem with installed package ipa-server-dns-4.9.8-2.module_el8.6.0+1053+0ac05726.noarch - package ipa-server-dns-4.9.8-2.module_el8.6.0+1053+0ac05726.noarch requires bind-dyndb-ldap >= 11.2-2, but none of the providers can be installed - package bind-dyndb-ldap-11.6-2.module_el8.5.0+750+c59b186b.x86_64 requires libdns.so.1112()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package bind-dyndb-ldap-11.6-2.module_el8.4.0+639+a88aab78.x86_64 requires libdns.so.1112()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.26-6.el8.x86_64 requires bind-license = 32:9.11.26-6.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.26-3.el8.x86_64 requires bind-license = 32:9.11.26-3.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package bind-libs-lite-32:9.11.26-4.el8_4.x86_64 requires bind-license = 32:9.11.26-4.el8_4, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both bind-license-32:9.11.36-2.el8.noarch and bind-license-32:9.11.26-6.el8.noarch - cannot install both bind-license-32:9.11.36-2.el8.noarch and bind-license-32:9.11.26-3.el8.noarch - cannot install both bind-license-32:9.11.36-2.el8.noarch and bind-license-32:9.11.26-4.el8_4.noarch - cannot install the best update candidate for package bind-license-32:9.11.26-6.el8.noarch many thanks, L

5 9

Announcing https://debuginfod.centos.org service
by Fabian Arrotin 09 Feb '22

09 Feb '22

Some time ago, we got a request to provide a debuginfod service for CentOS 8-stream and 9-stream. (see ticket https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/500 for details) Service / infra is now live and available directly at https://debuginfod.centos.org That means that people who want to consume transparently debuginfo pkgs can use that service instead of manually fetching the debuginfo corresponding pkgs (matching NVR, etc) Thanks to the collaboration with Frank Eigler (initial requester), the service was tested and is now operational. For more info about debuginfod, you can read https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Debuginfod (linked from https://debuginfod.centos.org/) Worth knowing that there is a manual step for now but Frank already opened a bugzilla ticket to transparently enable that new feature (you can track ticket https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2052574) Last but not least : this public debuginfod service is tracking/indexing *all* pkgs built for 8-stream and 9-stream, including SIGs packages, and so should be available quickly once the matching other packages are landing on public mirror network. Thanks a lot to Frank for the received advice on setting this service up. Kind Regards, -- Fabian Arrotin The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org gpg key: 17F3B7A1 | twitter: @arrfab

1 0

Resigning from Kmods SIG
by Jonathan Billings 08 Feb '22

08 Feb '22

Hello, I am resigning my role as co-chair of the Kmods SIG. Please let me know if I need to change my account settings in git or other centos systems. -- Jonathan Billings

3 2

resilientstorage - resource-agents-paf
by lejeczek 07 Feb '22

07 Feb '22

Hi guys. Anybody gets this?: -> $ dnf update Last metadata expiration check: 0:13:07 ago on Mon 07 Feb 2022 08:47:24 GMT. Error: Problem: package resource-agents-paf-4.9.0-7.el8.x86_64 requires resource-agents = 4.9.0-7.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both resource-agents-4.9.0-13.el8.x86_64 and resource-agents-4.9.0-7.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both resource-agents-4.9.0-7.el8.x86_64 and resource-agents-4.9.0-13.el8.x86_64 - cannot install the best update candidate for package resource-agents-paf-4.9.0-7.el8.x86_64 - cannot install the best update candidate for package resource-agents-4.9.0-7.el8.x86_64 (try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting packages or '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages) many thanks, L

1 0

CentOS Stream 9 security patches: Where is polkit?
by Steven Rosenberg 03 Feb '22

03 Feb '22

I have been looking for the polkit patch for CentOS Stream 9, and I have not seen a new package in the repo. Am I missing something?

6 10

CentOS 8 stream Messaging SIG rabbitmq mirrorlist url
by Daniel Nilsson 01 Feb '22

01 Feb '22

Hi Not sure if there is work already going on or if it has not been brought to anyones attention. The mirrorlist url supplied by centos-release-rabbitmq-38 rpm in the Extras repo still uses the now removed "mirrorlist.centos.org/8" address. Are there any plans to release a new version of the package that use/supply the working "8-stream" address? Best regards Daniel Nilsson Daniel Nilsson Software Integrations Engineer dnilsson(a)itrsgroup.com www.itrsgroup.com ITRS Group Första Långgatan 19 413 27 Gothenburg Sweden Tel.+46 31-352 56 00 Internet communications are not secure and therefore the ITRS Group does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the ITRS Group unless otherwise specifically stated. [itrs.email.signature] Disclaimer The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out more visit the Mimecast website.

1 0

Re: [CentOS-devel] Is advanced-virt (Virtualization SIG) not relevant anymore with latest CentOS Stream 8?
by Igor Raits 31 Jan '22

31 Jan '22

Hi Danilo, Thanks for the very quick response! And thanks Sandro for including relevant people (as it was hard for me to find appropriate emails). Have a great day, On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 2:04 PM Danilo de Paula <ddepaula(a)redhat.com> wrote: > Yes, until RHEL 8.5 the latest-and-greatest virt packages used to be > shipped within Advanced Virtualization. But since AV packages are part of > RHEL now, there's no need for updating the SIG anymore because RHEL has the > most updated packages and, by consequence, c8s should have those builds too. > > > > On Tue., Nov. 16, 2021, 7:25 a.m. Sandro Bonazzola, <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com> > wrote: > >> +Eduardo Lima <etrunko(a)redhat.com> +Danilo Cesar Lemes de Paula >> <ddepaula(a)redhat.com> >> >> Il giorno mar 16 nov 2021 alle ore 12:52 Igor Raits <igor.raits(a)gmail.com> >> ha scritto: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I've noticed that the latest c8s repos ship libvirt/qemu-kvm (and other >>> related things) newer than the advanced virtualization repository… which >>> brings me to a question if it is still worth using those builds or not? >>> >>> I've been trying to dig into some mailing list conversations (which are >>> pretty much non-existent at this point) and IRC meetings (which I did not >>> see in October, but found one in November[1]). Found only mention that >>> libvirt/qemu will not be available for power arches since c9s and that's >>> what probably virt sig will build (if my understanding of meeting minutes >>> are correct). >>> >>> Any piece of information would be very helpful :) >>> >>> >>> [1] >>> https://www.centos.org/minutes/2021/November/centos-meeting.2021-11-03-17.0… >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> Sandro Bonazzola >> >> MANAGER, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING, EMEA R&D RHV >> >> Red Hat EMEA <https://www.redhat.com/> >> >> sbonazzo(a)redhat.com >> <https://www.redhat.com/> >> >> *Red Hat respects your work life balance. Therefore there is no need to >> answer this email out of your office hours.* >> >> >>

3 4

Does Red Hat publish EUS source?
by Gordon Messmer 31 Jan '22

31 Jan '22

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux#Extende… I do see that EUS source packages are available to customers in the errata portal, but I was looking at the article for Red Hat Enterprise Linux on Wikipedia, and saw a note there to the effect that rebuilds don't publish updates from EUS because Red Hat doesn't publish it for rebuilding. I vaguely recall that CentOS pulled source from an FTP source that the claim might describe, but I can't find any information that I think is really conclusive. The question is mostly trivia, but if the claim on Wikipedia isn't accurate, then I'll update that page.

2 1

Dist-git's git structure in CBS
by Pierre-Yves Chibon 28 Jan '22

28 Jan '22

Good Morning Everyone, Nowadays we have different structures in the git repositories of the dist-git instance for CBS and for CentOS-Stream. CBS' dist-git (used by the SIG and for CentOS Linux 7, CentOS-Stream 8), uses something like: ├── .gitignore ├── .kernel.metadata ├── SOURCES │ ├─ .... │ ├── patch-5.14.0-redhat.patch │ ├─ ... │ └── x509.genkey.rhel └── SPECS └── kernel.spec Ie: patches and other sources in a SOURCES folder, spec in a SPECS folder and the link between the git repo and the lookaside cache is done via the `.<packagename>.metadata` file. source: https://git.centos.org/rpms/kernel/tree/c8s On CentOS-Stream 9, the structure is similar to Fedora's structure where everything is in the top directory. source: https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream/rpms/kernel I was wondering if there has been some thoughts given on harmonizing these structures? I am particularly interested on changing them for SIG building on the top of CS9. It would make pulling changes from gitlab onto the SIG's repo a lot easier I believe. I suspect there may be some work to do for this and if I'm pointed to the right direction, I wouldn't mind having a look at it but first I'd like to know if it's a good idea :) So... what do you think? Thanks, Pierre

5 5

Broken CentOS Stream 9 repo today
by Alfredo Moralejo Alonso 28 Jan '22

28 Jan '22

Hi, After last compose CS9 promotion, BaseOS/AppStream repos seems broken: - [root@6b5a57fab5b4 /]# dnf install gcc - Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:25 ago on Thu Jan 27 08:45:21 2022. - Error: - Problem: cannot install the best candidate for the job - - nothing provides libgomp = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 needed by gcc-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 - - nothing provides libgcc >= 11.2.1-7.6.el9 needed by gcc-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 - (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages) - [root@6b5a57fab5b4 /]# dnf install gcc-c++ - Last metadata expiration check: 0:01:56 ago on Thu Jan 27 08:45:21 2022. - Error: - Problem: cannot install the best candidate for the job - - nothing provides libstdc++ = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 needed by gcc-c++-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 - (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages) - [root@6b5a57fab5b4 /]# Repoclosure is also complaining: - package: gcc-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libgcc >= 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - libgomp = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - package: gcc-c++-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libstdc++ = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - package: gcc-gfortran-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libquadmath = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - libgfortran = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - package: libgomp-offload-nvptx-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libgomp = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - package: libquadmath-devel-11.2.1-7.6.el9.i686 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libquadmath = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - package: libquadmath-devel-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libquadmath = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - package: libstdc++-devel-11.2.1-7.6.el9.i686 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libstdc++(x86-32) = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - package: libstdc++-devel-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libstdc++(x86-64) = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 Best regards, Alfredo

2 2

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

devel