On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Sandro Bonazzola <sbona...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Dan Kenigsberg <dan...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 10:17 AM, Sandro Bonazzola <sbona...@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 > de...@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)
_______________________________________________ Infra mailing list Infra@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
