[CentOS-devel] weird (non-functional) downgrade

[lejeczek]

On 26/01/17 20:16, Anssi Johansson wrote:
> 26.1.2017, 21.45, lejeczek kirjoitti:
>>
>>
>> On 26/01/17 17:46, Anssi Johansson wrote:
>>> 26.1.2017, 19.18, lejeczek kirjoitti:
>>>> dear devel
>>>>
>>>> is this true that every rpm downgrade goes kind of a 
>>>> ... "haywire" ?
>>>>
>>>> I've tried a few and...
>>>>
>>>>  ~]$ yum downgrade ctdb
>>>> --> Running transaction check
>>>> ---> Package ctdb.x86_64 0:4.4.4-9.el7 will be a downgrade
>>>> --> Processing Dependency: samba-client-libs = 
>>>> 4.4.4-9.el7 for package:
>>>> ctdb-4.4.4-9.el7.x86_64
>>>> ---> Package ctdb.x86_64 0:4.4.4-12.el7_3 will be erased
>>>> --> Running transaction check
>>>> ---> Package samba-client-libs.i686 0:4.4.4-9.el7 will 
>>>> be installed
>>>> <= ?????
>>>>
>>>> ~]$ yum downgrade bind
>>>> Resolving Dependencies
>>>> --> Running transaction check
>>>> ---> Package bind.x86_64 32:9.9.4-38.el7_3 will be a 
>>>> downgrade
>>>> --> Processing Dependency: bind-libs = 
>>>> 32:9.9.4-38.el7_3 for package:
>>>> 32:bind-9.9.4-38.el7_3.x86_64
>>>> ---> Package bind.x86_64 32:9.9.4-38.el7_3.1 will be 
>>>> erased
>>>> --> Running transaction check
>>>> ---> Package bind.x86_64 32:9.9.4-38.el7_3.1 will be 
>>>> erased
>>>> ---> Package bind-libs.i686 32:9.9.4-38.el7_3 will be 
>>>> installed    <=
>>>> ????
>>>>
>>>> etc.
>>>> and system has no signle 686 rpm. Some kind of a curse 
>>>> my boxes suffer
>>>> from? :)
>>>
>>> It looks like resolving the dependencies is the problem. 
>>> If you tried
>>> downgrading bind with a "yum downgrade bind bind-libs 
>>> bind-license
>>> bind-utils bind-chroot bind-libs-lite", it would work.
>>
>> but something is plain wrong there, is it not? And it is 
>> not bind.
>> Try another one, java:
>>
>> --> Running transaction check
>> ---> Package java-1.8.0-openjdk.x86_64 
>> 1:1.8.0.111-2.b15.el7_3 will be a
>> downgrade
>> --> Processing Dependency: java-1.8.0-openjdk-headless =
>> 1:1.8.0.111-2.b15.el7_3 for package:
>> 1:java-1.8.0-openjdk-1.8.0.111-2.b15.el7_3.x86_64
>> ---> Package java-1.8.0-openjdk.x86_64 
>> 1:1.8.0.121-0.b13.el7_3 will be
>> erased
>> --> Finished Dependency Resolution
>> Error: Package: 
>> 1:java-1.8.0-openjdk-1.8.0.111-2.b15.el7_3.x86_64 (updates)
>>            Requires: java-1.8.0-openjdk-headless = 
>> 1:1.8.0.111-2.b15.el7_3
>>            Installed:
>> 1:java-1.8.0-openjdk-headless-1.8.0.121-0.b13.el7_3.x86_64 
>> (@updates)
>>                java-1.8.0-openjdk-headless = 
>> 1:1.8.0.121-0.b13.el7_3
>>            Available:
>> 1:java-1.8.0-openjdk-headless-1.8.0.102-4.b14.el7.i686 
>> (base) <= ???
>> why does this i686 arch try to force its way in? Each time.
>>
>> It smells like something fundamental.
>> Could it be that yum repos are somehow broken.
>> Being a long time ex-user of Scientific I remember I 
>> never had seen
>> anything similar. Downgrading samba after a buggy update 
>> saved me a few
>> times.
>> Would be really good to know that we Centosians can rely 
>> on yum/dnf
>> downgrade.
>
> I did not say that the behaviour was OK, I only provided a 
> workaround. In the java case, you would need to run "yum 
> downgrade java-1.8.0-openjdk java-1.8.0-openjdk-headless" 
> to downgrade java. Apparently yum can't pick the correct 
> architecture in this particular case. The repositories are 
> OK. The problem lies in how yum interprets the 
> requirements of each package, and what the packages provide.
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1388520 is 
> related, and apparently in this particular case they will 
> adjust the java packages to add the matching architecture 
> requirement.
> _______________________________


could be that some bits actually are missing in repo?
If for example - yum downgrade ctdb - ought to work, then 
... a version ctdb-4.4.4-12.el7_3.x86_64(current) would go 
back to ctdb-4.4.4-9.el7.x86_64(as the rest of samba suite) 
which I had just a few days ago, but... I'm looking at repo 
and .. I fail to find it.


> ________________
> CentOS-devel mailing list
> CentOS-devel at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel