RE: 0.99 vs redhat

Rob Hagopian <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.network.up2date.current.devel
Message-ID <F4A736AE282FD511BC28009027CC7C590236B4C2@gopostal> 
Not quite yet :-)

This makes v7.2, and more specificly rpm-python-4.0.3-1.03 a prerequsite for
current-0.99 and the spec file should be updated to reflect that...

Personally, I'd prefer to see a workaround for 7.1, esp if there are other
rpm-python calls that would correctly version the dbs...
								-Rob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Berninger [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 11:45 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Current-server] 0.99 vs redhat
> 
> 
> Well, with that, I'll assume that the problem was a bug in 7.1's rpm
> module and was fixed in 7.2.  Any objections to closing this 
> issue?  :)
> 
> On Fri, 08 Mar 2002, Rob Hagopian wrote:
> 
> > [root@abbott i386]# for i in * ; do rpm -qp $i 
> --queryformat "%{NAME}
> > %{EPOCH} %{VERSION} %{RELEASE}\n"; done
> > php (none) 3.0.18 1.6.x
> > php (none) 3.0.18 8
> > php-imap (none) 3.0.18 1.6.x
> > php-imap (none) 3.0.18 8
> > php-ldap (none) 3.0.18 1.6.x
> > php-ldap (none) 3.0.18 8
> > php-manual (none) 3.0.18 1.6.x
> > php-manual (none) 3.0.18 8
> > php-pgsql (none) 3.0.18 1.6.x
> > php-pgsql (none) 3.0.18 8
> > [root@abbott i386]#
> > 
> > You're right, the server above is v7.1, our other current 
> servers are v7.2,
> > sorry... But 7.2 does work better (correctly, even):
> > 
> > [root@x2hvd test]# rpm -q rpm-python
> > rpm-python-4.0.3-1.03
> > [root@x2hvd test]# cadmin create dh-test
> > Mar 03 16:39:13 Adding php-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm
> > Mar 03 16:39:13 Adding php-imap-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm
> > Mar 03 16:39:13 Adding php-ldap-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm
> > Mar 03 16:39:13 Adding php-manual-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Adding php-pgsql-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Adding php-3.0.18-1.6.x.i386.rpm
> > Mar 03 16:39:14   type(hit) = <type 'string'>
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 hit = php:3.0.18:8:
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Comparing packages: php-3.0.18-1.6.x and 
> php-3.0.18-8
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Package is older than package already in database.
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Adding php-imap-3.0.18-1.6.x.i386.rpm
> > Mar 03 16:39:14   type(hit) = <type 'string'>
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 hit = php-imap:3.0.18:8:
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Comparing packages: php-imap-3.0.18-1.6.x and
> > php-imap-3.0.18-8
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Package is older than package already in database.
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Adding php-ldap-3.0.18-1.6.x.i386.rpm
> > Mar 03 16:39:14   type(hit) = <type 'string'>
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 hit = php-ldap:3.0.18:8:
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Comparing packages: php-ldap-3.0.18-1.6.x and
> > php-ldap-3.0.18-8
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Package is older than package already in database.
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Adding php-manual-3.0.18-1.6.x.i386.rpm
> > Mar 03 16:39:14   type(hit) = <type 'string'>
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 hit = php-manual:3.0.18:8:
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Comparing packages: php-manual-3.0.18-1.6.x and
> > php-manual-3.0.18-8
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Package is older than package already in database.
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Adding php-pgsql-3.0.18-1.6.x.i386.rpm
> > Mar 03 16:39:14   type(hit) = <type 'string'>
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 hit = php-pgsql:3.0.18:8:
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Comparing packages: php-pgsql-3.0.18-1.6.x and
> > php-pgsql-3.0.18-8
> > Mar 03 16:39:14 Package is older than package already in database.
> > [root@x2hvd test]#
> > 
> > 								-Rob
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: John Berninger [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 11:26 AM
> > > To: [email protected]
> > > Subject: Re: [Current-server] 0.99 vs redhat
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Rob -
> > > 
> > >         Could you issue the following RPM query for each 
> of the files
> > > involved (i.e. php-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm vs 
> php-3.0.18-1.6.x.i386.rpm):
> > > 
> > >         rpm -qp $filename --queryformat "%{NAME} %{EPOCH} 
> %{VERSION}
> > > %{RELEASE}" and send us the output?
> > > 
> > >         Also, you mentioned you're running on 7.2, but the
> > > rpm-python-4.0.2-8 package is a 7.1 RPM; the version 
> shipped with 7.2
> > > was rpm-python-4.0.3-1.03.  Do you have a spare machine you 
> > > can do a new
> > > install of 7.2 on available, then up2date it through RHN, 
> then test a
> > > fresh install of the current-0.99.0 RPM, to see what a 
> > > sanitized install
> > > does for you?
> > > 
> > > On Fri, 08 Mar 2002, Rob Hagopian wrote:
> > > 
> > > > rpm-python-4.0.2-8
> > > > 
> > > > I am able to reproduce it:
> > > > 	Make the package directory
> > > > 	Move in the most recent (php-3.0.18-8) packages
> > > > 	[cadmin create <- shouldn't be necessary, but I 
> did do it]
> > > > 	Move in the old (php-3.0.18-1.6.x) packages
> > > > 	cadmin create
> > > > 
> > > > Yields:
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:22 Adding php-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:22 Adding php-imap-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:22 Adding php-ldap-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:22 Adding php-manual-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Adding php-pgsql-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Adding php-3.0.18-1.6.x.i386.rpm
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23   type(hit) = <type 'string'>
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 hit = php:3.0.18:8:
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Comparing packages: php-3.0.18-1.6.x and 
> > > php-3.0.18-8
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Removing php-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Older package deleted from db.
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Adding php-imap-3.0.18-1.6.x.i386.rpm
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23   type(hit) = <type 'string'>
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 hit = php-imap:3.0.18:8:
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Comparing packages: php-imap-3.0.18-1.6.x and
> > > > php-imap-3.0.18-8
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Removing php-imap-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Older package deleted from db.
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Adding php-ldap-3.0.18-1.6.x.i386.rpm
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23   type(hit) = <type 'string'>
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 hit = php-ldap:3.0.18:8:
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Comparing packages: php-ldap-3.0.18-1.6.x and
> > > > php-ldap-3.0.18-8
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Removing php-ldap-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Older package deleted from db.
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Adding php-manual-3.0.18-1.6.x.i386.rpm
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23   type(hit) = <type 'string'>
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 hit = php-manual:3.0.18:8:
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Comparing packages: php-manual-3.0.18-1.6.x and
> > > > php-manual-3.0.18-8
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Removing php-manual-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:23 Older package deleted from db.
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:24 Adding php-pgsql-3.0.18-1.6.x.i386.rpm
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:24   type(hit) = <type 'string'>
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:24 hit = php-pgsql:3.0.18:8:
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:24 Comparing packages: php-pgsql-3.0.18-1.6.x and
> > > > php-pgsql-3.0.18-8
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:24 Removing php-pgsql-3.0.18-8.i386.rpm
> > > > Mar 03 10:25:24 Older package deleted from db.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > This does NOT happen if you add in the old (-1.6.x) 
> packages to the
> > > > directory first (or both at the same time using 'mv 
> php-* i386/.'),
> > > > suggesting that the label comparison isn't really working 
> > > and that the
> > > > directory listings are really providing the ordering?
> > > > 							
> 	-Rob
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: John Berninger [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > > > Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 10:07 AM
> > > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > > Cc: Rob Hagopian
> > > > > Subject: Re: [Current-server] 0.99 vs redhat
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Rob -
> > > > > 
> > > > >         I've just tested the compare you indicated, and 
> > > I'm getting a
> > > > > different result.  The compare is issuing: 
> > > > >         rpm.labelCompare( ('', '3.0.18', '1.6.x'), ('', 
> > > > > '3.0.18', '8'))
> > > > > which should result in a -1, and which should then exit the 
> > > > > routine and
> > > > > go on to the next RPM.  When I manually issue this compare, I 
> > > > > do indeed
> > > > > get a -1:
> > > > > 
> > > > > >>> rpm.labelCompare( ('', '3.0.18', '1.6.x'), ('', 
> > > '3.0.18', '8'))
> > > > > -1
> > > > > 
> > > > > What version of the rpm-python package are you using?
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Fri, 08 Mar 2002, Rob Hagopian wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Yes, that was from the 6.2 tree (hence the question about 
> > > > > rpm v3 perhaps
> > > > > > being different)...
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Server is RH 7.2, running current 0.99, clients are 6.2, 
> > > > > 7.0, 7.1, and
> > > > > > 7.2...
> > > > > > 							
> > > 	-Rob
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: John Berninger [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > > > > > Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 9:24 AM
> > > > > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Current-server] 0.99 vs redhat
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Rob -
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > >         I'm trying to confirm this is a bug in the 
> > > > > rpm.labelCompare()
> > > > > > > function / code, but in my 7.2 tree I see only php 4.x 
> > > > > packages.  What
> > > > > > > release level are you attempting to server with Current?  
> > > > > Also, what
> > > > > > > release level is your Current server (Red Hat 
> > > version, not Current
> > > > > > > version)?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > On Thu, 07 Mar 2002, Rob Hagopian wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > inlined too...
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > >         Eww.  This is not good - the code 
> used to compare 
> > > > > > > the package
> > > > > > > > > ages is take directly from the Python RPM 
> bindings - we 
> > > > > > > actually make a
> > > > > > > > > call to rpm.labelCompare() which is 
> implemented inside 
> > > > > > > the rpm-python
> > > > > > > > > shared library.  I'll check Red Hat's bugzilla and if 
> > > > > > > encessary submit a
> > > > > > > > > bug about this.  I don't think we can do 
> much, since we 
> > > > > > > don't want to be
> > > > > > > > > in the business of comparing RPM ages...  
> that gets ugly 
> > > > > > > real quick.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Of course not... strangely enough it did 
> correctly figure 
> > > > > > > out the other
> > > > > > > > associated php packages (kicking out -1.6.x in favor of 
> > > > > > > -8)... could this be
> > > > > > > > related to the fact that these are redhat 6.2 
> > > packages (rpm v3)?
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > >         This is definitely somewhere in the 
> Current code 
> > > > > > > - I'll try to
> > > > > > > > > take a look at it tonight / tomorrow / this 
> weekend.  I'm 
> > > > > > > not /too/
> > > > > > > > > surprised at this, but having it warn me about 
> > > > > symlink issues on
> > > > > > > > > different archs doesn't really seem quite right.  :)
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > And I wasn't too concerned about it (I've 
> gotten real used 
> > > > > > > to spurious
> > > > > > > > warnings with gcc :-) ), but I did clean up the 
> tree rather 
> > > > > > > than gamble, so
> > > > > > > > I can't tell you if it actually did 
> the-right-thing(tm)...
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > >         Except for the PHP thing above, you 
> > > really shouldn't 
> > > > > > > > > have to do that anymore - or, at least, we'd 
> hoped so...
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > As long as v1.0 is perfect ;-)
> > > > > > > > 							
> > > > > 	-Rob
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Current-server mailing list
> > > > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > > 
> http://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/current-server
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > Thank you,
> > > > > > > John Berninger
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Systems Administrator		[email protected]
> > > > > > > Department of Mathematics	Box 8205, Harrelson Hall
> > > > > > > NC State University		Raleigh, NC 27695
> > > > > > > Phone:  (919)515-6315		Fax:	(919)515-3798
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > GPG Key ID: A8C1D45C
> > > > > > >         Fingerprint: B1BB 90CB 5314 3113 CF22  
> 66AE 822D 42A8 
> > > > > > > A8C1 D45C
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Current-server mailing list
> > > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > 
> http://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/current-server
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Current-server mailing list
> > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > http://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/current-server
> > > > > 
> > > > > -- 
> > > > > Thank you,
> > > > > John Berninger
> > > > > 
> > > > > Systems Administrator		[email protected]
> > > > > Department of Mathematics	Box 8205, Harrelson Hall
> > > > > NC State University		Raleigh, NC 27695
> > > > > Phone:  (919)515-6315		Fax:	(919)515-3798
> > > > > 
> > > > > GPG Key ID: A8C1D45C
> > > > >         Fingerprint: B1BB 90CB 5314 3113 CF22  66AE 822D 42A8 
> > > > > A8C1 D45C
> > > > > --
> > > > > 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Current-server mailing list
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > http://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/current-server
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Thank you,
> > > John Berninger
> > > 
> > > Systems Administrator		[email protected]
> > > Department of Mathematics	Box 8205, Harrelson Hall
> > > NC State University		Raleigh, NC 27695
> > > Phone:  (919)515-6315		Fax:	(919)515-3798
> > > 
> > > GPG Key ID: A8C1D45C
> > >         Fingerprint: B1BB 90CB 5314 3113 CF22  66AE 822D 42A8 
> > > A8C1 D45C
> > > --
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Current-server mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/current-server
> > > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Current-server mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/current-server
> 
> -- 
> Thank you,
> John Berninger
> 
> Systems Administrator		[email protected]
> Department of Mathematics	Box 8205, Harrelson Hall
> NC State University		Raleigh, NC 27695
> Phone:  (919)515-6315		Fax:	(919)515-3798
> 
> GPG Key ID: A8C1D45C
>         Fingerprint: B1BB 90CB 5314 3113 CF22  66AE 822D 42A8 
> A8C1 D45C
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Current-server mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/current-server
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.