----- Original Message ----- > When I try to "vagrant up" with all git repos on "master", I get an exciting > explosion with this error at the core: > > raise exc\r\ndnf.exceptions.DepsolveError: installed package > python2-lxml-3.7.0-1.fc24.x86_64 obsoletes python-lxml < 3.7.0-1.fc24 > provided by python-lxml-3.4.4-4.fc24.x86_64 > > The steps leading up to this are that the setup: > > - scrapes pulp spec files for Requires statements > - finds one for "python-lxml" in the pulp_rpm spec file > - tries to use dnf to install python-lxml, among many other dependencies > > dnf doesn't like this one bit. I think it comes down to ambiguity over these > two points: > > python2-lxml is installed on the system and "Provides" python-lxml > python-lxml is also an available RPM, but it's obsoleted by python2-lxml > > When I run "dnf install python-lxml", it matches the RPM with that exact > name, not the already-installed RPM that merely "Provides" that name, and > then complains > > But if I install something that "Requires: python-lxml", like > pulp-rpm-plugins, dnf happily resolves that as you might expect. > > Reading the man page for dnf, that behavior matches what is described in the > "SPECIFYING PACKAGES" section: > > "Failing to match the input argument to an existing package name based on the > patterns above, DNF tries to see if the argument matches an existing > provide." > > dnf does match the argument to a package name, and when it encounters a dep > solving error, it does not go back and continue its matching algorithm. It > never gets to the point of trying to match the argument to a "provide". > > So what should we do? This seems to be a quirk of F24 that might be unusual. > > - We could change our spec file for F24+ to "Require: python2-lxml" > - We could handle this as a special case in the ansible facts, and modify the > value before trying to use it with dnf.
Since Pulp installs properly on Fedora 24, it sounds like we have a problem with how we provision our development environment. Modifying the ansible facts is the right approach for resolving this problem. Did you file an issue in Redmine for this? > - $YOUR_IDEA_HERE > > What do you all think? > > Michael > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > Pulp-dev@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > _______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
