FailsToInstall bugs filed even though all dependencies were submitted as one update

[Julian Sikorski]

Hello,

I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:

- https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
- https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9a07603dd6
- https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ab9857bfaf

Despite putting the gnome-chemistry-utils update into the same batch, 3 
FailsToInstall bugs were filed:

- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077398
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077400
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077401

Am I doing something wrong?

Best regards,
Julian

[Jerry James]

On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 9:30 AM Julian Sikorski <belegdol(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
>
>  - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
>  - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9a07603dd6
>  - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ab9857bfaf
>
>  Despite putting the gnome-chemistry-utils update into the same batch, 3
>  FailsToInstall bugs were filed:
>
>  - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077398
>  - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077400
>  - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077401
>
>  Am I doing something wrong? 
Those bugs say that the packages require
libspreadsheet-1.12.51.so()(64bit), but you've got a build of
gnumeric-1.12.52 in those builds, which provides
libspreadsheet-1.12.52.so()(64bit).  It looks like they were built
against the previous version of gnumeric, instead of the one in the
updates.
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/

[Miro Hrončok]

On 21. 04. 22 17:21, Julian Sikorski wrote:
>  Hello,
>  
>  I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
>  
>  - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
>  - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9a07603dd6
>  - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ab9857bfaf
>  
>  Despite putting the gnome-chemistry-utils update into the same batch, 3 
>  FailsToInstall bugs were filed:
>  
>  - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077398
>  - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077400
>  - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077401
>  
>  Am I doing something wrong? 
The bugzillas are opened because the installation fails in the buildroot.

They literally say:

>  If this bug has been reported in the middle of upgrading multiple
> dependent
>  packages, please consider using side tags:
>  
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#updating-inter...

It seem you used buildroot overrides instead and haven't expired them after the 
updates were created.

https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/overrides/?user=belegdol

When you expire the overrides, the bugzillas will likely be closed.

Using buildroot overrides isn't exactly "wrong", but it creates a temporary

installability issue in the buildroot. Using side tags instead avoids this problem.

-- 
Miro Hrončok
-- 
Phone: [phone]
IRC: mhroncok

[Julian Sikorski]

Am 21.04.22 um 17:42 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
>  On 21. 04. 22 17:21, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
> >
> > - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
> > - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9a07603dd6
> > - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ab9857bfaf
> >
> > Despite putting the gnome-chemistry-utils update into the same batch, 
> > 3 FailsToInstall bugs were filed:
> >
> > - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077398
> > - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077400
> > - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077401
> >
> > Am I doing something wrong?
>  
>  The bugzillas are opened because the installation fails in the buildroot.
>  
>  They literally say:
>  
>   > If this bug has been reported in the middle of upgrading multiple 
>  dependent
>   > packages, please consider using side tags:
>   > 
>
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#updating-inter...
>
>  
>  
>  It seem you used buildroot overrides instead and haven't expired them 
>  after the updates were created.
>  
>  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/overrides/?user=belegdol
>  
>  When you expire the overrides, the bugzillas will likely be closed.
>  
>  Using buildroot overrides isn't exactly "wrong", but it creates a 
>  temporary installability issue in the buildroot. Using side tags instead 
>  avoids this problem.
>   
Thanks, I have expired the overrides and have read about the side tags. 
Am I understanding correctly that these only work for rawhide?

Best regards,
Julian

[Miro Hrončok]

On 21. 04. 22 17:49, Julian Sikorski wrote:
>  Am 21.04.22 um 17:42 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
> > On 21. 04. 22 17:21, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
> >>
> >> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
> >> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9a07603dd6
> >> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ab9857bfaf
> >>
> >> Despite putting the gnome-chemistry-utils update into the same batch, 3 
> >> FailsToInstall bugs were filed:
> >>
> >> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077398
> >> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077400
> >> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077401
> >>
> >> Am I doing something wrong?
> >
> > The bugzillas are opened because the installation fails in the buildroot.
> >
> > They literally say:
> >
> >  > If this bug has been reported in the middle of upgrading multiple dependent
> >  > packages, please consider using side tags:
> >  > 
> >
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#updating-inter...
>
> >
> >
> > It seem you used buildroot overrides instead and haven't expired them after 
> > the updates were created.
> >
> > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/overrides/?user=belegdol
> >
> > When you expire the overrides, the bugzillas will likely be closed.
> >
> > Using buildroot overrides isn't exactly "wrong", but it creates a
> temporary 
> > installability issue in the buildroot. Using side tags instead avoids this 
> > problem.
> >
>  Thanks, I have expired the overrides and have read about the side tags. Am I 
>  understanding correctly that these only work for rawhide? 
Not at all, they work for all branches.

I've opened https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/package-maintainer-docs/issue/72

-- 
Miro Hrončok
-- 
Phone: [phone]
IRC: mhroncok

[Julian Sikorski]

Am 21.04.22 um 20:11 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
>  On 21. 04. 22 17:49, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> > Am 21.04.22 um 17:42 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
> >> On 21. 04. 22 17:21, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
> >>>
> >>> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
> >>> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9a07603dd6
> >>> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ab9857bfaf
> >>>
> >>> Despite putting the gnome-chemistry-utils update into the same 
> >>> batch, 3 FailsToInstall bugs were filed:
> >>>
> >>> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077398
> >>> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077400
> >>> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077401
> >>>
> >>> Am I doing something wrong?
> >>
> >> The bugzillas are opened because the installation fails in the 
> >> buildroot.
> >>
> >> They literally say:
> >>
> >>  > If this bug has been reported in the middle of upgrading multiple 
> >> dependent
> >>  > packages, please consider using side tags:
> >>  > 
> >>
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#updating-inter...
>
> >>
> >>
> >> It seem you used buildroot overrides instead and haven't expired them 
> >> after the updates were created.
> >>
> >> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/overrides/?user=belegdol
> >>
> >> When you expire the overrides, the bugzillas will likely be closed.
> >>
> >> Using buildroot overrides isn't exactly "wrong", but it creates a 
> >> temporary installability issue in the buildroot. Using side tags 
> >> instead avoids this problem.
> >>
> > Thanks, I have expired the overrides and have read about the side 
> > tags. Am I understanding correctly that these only work for rawhide?
>  
>  Not at all, they work for all branches.
>  
>  I've opened https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/package-maintainer-docs/issue/72
>   
Nice, thanks! I will keep this in mind when doing the next update. Do 
side tags support chain-building as well? If they do, this would make 
doing such updates much easier as all the builds could be initiated at 
the same time instead of waiting for builds to finish and the buildroots 
to populate.

Best regards,
Julian

[Miro Hrončok]

On 21. 04. 22 20:23, Julian Sikorski wrote:
>  Am 21.04.22 um 20:11 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
> > On 21. 04. 22 17:49, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> >> Am 21.04.22 um 17:42 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
> >>> On 21. 04. 22 17:21, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> >>>> Hello,
> >>>>
> >>>> I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
> >>>>
> >>>> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
> >>>> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9a07603dd6
> >>>> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ab9857bfaf
> >>>>
> >>>> Despite putting the gnome-chemistry-utils update into the same batch, 3 
> >>>> FailsToInstall bugs were filed:
> >>>>
> >>>> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077398
> >>>> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077400
> >>>> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077401
> >>>>
> >>>> Am I doing something wrong?
> >>>
> >>> The bugzillas are opened because the installation fails in the buildroot.
> >>>
> >>> They literally say:
> >>>
> >>>  > If this bug has been reported in the middle of upgrading multiple
> dependent
> >>>  > packages, please consider using side tags:
> >>>  > 
> >>>
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#updating-inter...
>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> It seem you used buildroot overrides instead and haven't expired them
> after 
> >>> the updates were created.
> >>>
> >>> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/overrides/?user=belegdol
> >>>
> >>> When you expire the overrides, the bugzillas will likely be closed.
> >>>
> >>> Using buildroot overrides isn't exactly "wrong", but it creates
> a temporary 
> >>> installability issue in the buildroot. Using side tags instead avoids this 
> >>> problem.
> >>>
> >> Thanks, I have expired the overrides and have read about the side tags. Am I 
> >> understanding correctly that these only work for rawhide?
> >
> > Not at all, they work for all branches.
> >
> > I've opened https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/package-maintainer-docs/issue/72
> >
>  Nice, thanks! I will keep this in mind when doing the next update. Do side tags 
>  support chain-building as well? If they do, this would make doing such updates 
>  much easier as all the builds could be initiated at the same time instead of 
>  waiting for builds to finish and the buildroots to populate. 
Yes, they do! From my Shell history:

$ fedpkg chain-build --target f34-build-side-50273 --nowait --fail-fast 
libsavitar libarcus : python-uranium : CuraEngine cura

And indeed, it is much more convenient than chain builds with buildroot overrides.

-- 
Miro Hrončok
-- 
Phone: [phone]
IRC: mhroncok

[Julian Sikorski]

Am 21.04.22 um 20:30 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
>  On 21. 04. 22 20:23, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> > Am 21.04.22 um 20:11 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
> >> On 21. 04. 22 17:49, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> >>> Am 21.04.22 um 17:42 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
> >>>> On 21. 04. 22 17:21, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> >>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
> >>>>> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9a07603dd6
> >>>>> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ab9857bfaf
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Despite putting the gnome-chemistry-utils update into the same 
> >>>>> batch, 3 FailsToInstall bugs were filed:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077398
> >>>>> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077400
> >>>>> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077401
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Am I doing something wrong?
> >>>>
> >>>> The bugzillas are opened because the installation fails in the 
> >>>> buildroot.
> >>>>
> >>>> They literally say:
> >>>>
> >>>>  > If this bug has been reported in the middle of upgrading 
> >>>> multiple dependent
> >>>>  > packages, please consider using side tags:
> >>>>  > 
> >>>>
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#updating-inter...
>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> It seem you used buildroot overrides instead and haven't expired 
> >>>> them after the updates were created.
> >>>>
> >>>> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/overrides/?user=belegdol
> >>>>
> >>>> When you expire the overrides, the bugzillas will likely be closed.
> >>>>
> >>>> Using buildroot overrides isn't exactly "wrong", but it
> creates a 
> >>>> temporary installability issue in the buildroot. Using side tags 
> >>>> instead avoids this problem.
> >>>>
> >>> Thanks, I have expired the overrides and have read about the side 
> >>> tags. Am I understanding correctly that these only work for rawhide?
> >>
> >> Not at all, they work for all branches.
> >>
> >> I've opened 
> >> https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/package-maintainer-docs/issue/72
> >>
> > Nice, thanks! I will keep this in mind when doing the next update. Do 
> > side tags support chain-building as well? If they do, this would make 
> > doing such updates much easier as all the builds could be initiated at 
> > the same time instead of waiting for builds to finish and the 
> > buildroots to populate.
>  
>  Yes, they do! From my Shell history:
>  
>  $ fedpkg chain-build --target f34-build-side-50273 --nowait --fail-fast 
>  libsavitar libarcus : python-uranium : CuraEngine cura
>  
>  And indeed, it is much more convenient than chain builds with buildroot 
>  overrides.
>   
Nice, this is a substantial packager experience upgrade!

Best regards,
Julian

[Fabio Valentini]

On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 8:39 PM Julian Sikorski <belegdol(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Am 21.04.22 um 20:30 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
>  > On 21. 04. 22 20:23, Julian Sikorski wrote:
>  >> Am 21.04.22 um 20:11 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
>  >>> On 21. 04. 22 17:49, Julian Sikorski wrote:
>  >>>> Am 21.04.22 um 17:42 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
>  >>>>> On 21. 04. 22 17:21, Julian Sikorski wrote:
>  >>>>>> Hello,
>  >>>>>>
>  >>>>>> I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
>  >>>>>>
>  >>>>>> -
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
>  >>>>>> -
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9a07603dd6
>  >>>>>> -
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ab9857bfaf
>  >>>>>>
>  >>>>>> Despite putting the gnome-chemistry-utils update into the same
>  >>>>>> batch, 3 FailsToInstall bugs were filed:
>  >>>>>>
>  >>>>>> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077398
>  >>>>>> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077400
>  >>>>>> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077401
>  >>>>>>
>  >>>>>> Am I doing something wrong?
>  >>>>>
>  >>>>> The bugzillas are opened because the installation fails in the
>  >>>>> buildroot.
>  >>>>>
>  >>>>> They literally say:
>  >>>>>
>  >>>>>  > If this bug has been reported in the middle of upgrading
>  >>>>> multiple dependent
>  >>>>>  > packages, please consider using side tags:
>  >>>>>  >
>  >>>>>
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#updating-inter...
>  >>>>>
>  >>>>>
>  >>>>> It seem you used buildroot overrides instead and haven't
> expired
>  >>>>> them after the updates were created.
>  >>>>>
>  >>>>> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/overrides/?user=belegdol
>  >>>>>
>  >>>>> When you expire the overrides, the bugzillas will likely be closed.
>  >>>>>
>  >>>>> Using buildroot overrides isn't exactly "wrong", but
> it creates a
>  >>>>> temporary installability issue in the buildroot. Using side tags
>  >>>>> instead avoids this problem.
>  >>>>>
>  >>>> Thanks, I have expired the overrides and have read about the side
>  >>>> tags. Am I understanding correctly that these only work for rawhide?
>  >>>
>  >>> Not at all, they work for all branches.
>  >>>
>  >>> I've opened
>  >>> https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/package-maintainer-docs/issue/72
>  >>>
>  >> Nice, thanks! I will keep this in mind when doing the next update. Do
>  >> side tags support chain-building as well? If they do, this would make
>  >> doing such updates much easier as all the builds could be initiated at
>  >> the same time instead of waiting for builds to finish and the
>  >> buildroots to populate.
>  >
>  > Yes, they do! From my Shell history:
>  >
>  > $ fedpkg chain-build --target f34-build-side-50273 --nowait --fail-fast
>  > libsavitar libarcus : python-uranium : CuraEngine cura
>  >
>  > And indeed, it is much more convenient than chain builds with buildroot
>  > overrides.
>  >
>  Nice, this is a substantial packager experience upgrade! 
Note that if your builds depend on each other, you still need to wait
for the koji buildroots for that side tag to regenerate.
But using a side tag still makes this easier, since you can do
chain-builds and don't need to create buildroot overrides at all.

Fabio

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2022-04-21 at 17:49 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
>  > 
>  Thanks, I have expired the overrides and have read about the side tags. 
>  Am I understanding correctly that these only work for rawhide? 
Nope, you can use them for all releases now.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2022-04-21 at 17:21 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
>  Hello,
>  
>  I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
>  
>  - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
>  - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9a07603dd6
>  - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ab9857bfaf
>  
>  Despite putting the gnome-chemistry-utils update into the same batch, 3 
>  FailsToInstall bugs were filed:
>  
>  - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077398
>  - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077400
>  - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077401
>  
>  Am I doing something wrong? 
The bug text states:

"The data was generated solely from koji buildroot, so it might be
newer than the latest compose or the content on mirrors"

This sounds like Miro's tool just uses whatever is currently in the
buildroot - it is not working on the contents of updates or anything
like that.

If you handled this by submitting a buildroot override for
goffice/gnumeric and then building gnome-chemistry-utils , then I
imagine what happened is that Miro's tool ran these build tests against
the current stable g-c-u with the goffice/gnumeric from the buildroot
override, and so they failed.

The bug text does suggest a way you can avoid this: instead of using
buildroot overrides, use side tags. If you had created a side tag and
built goffice/gnumeric in it, then built g-c-u in it, then created an
update from it, then you should not get a bug filed. It's also a nicer
experience than using buildroot overrides once you're used to the
process, and it avoids the problem of something else unexpectedly
getting built against the buildroot override while it's active (which I
brought up a few weeks ago on this list).
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net