Il 30/01/2014 16:13, Yaniv Bronheim ha scritto: > Hey, > > we found this yum bug and still struggling with more issuing according to the > relation between those packages > > if we drop vdsm-python-cpopen the requirement in vdsm takes python-cpopen > instead. > in python-cpopen we have the same code base and it provides all > vdsm-ptyhon-cpopen provides, so shouldn't be any issues with dropping it from > the repository > > is it possible to ship 3.3.3 release that way ? we don't need to change the > requirement in the code, if python-cpopen 1.3-1 is part of the release, it > will be taken by vdsm spec (tried with vdsm 4.13.3-2 with the available > cpopen 1.3-1) >
I can't release 3.3.3 that way. We're keeping rolling releases on stable repository so if I don't provide 4.13.3-2, previous one will still be available. > Sven, for your question, install python-cpopen 1.3-1 for both 3.3 and 3.4 > releases that you use, and the upgrade\downgrade should not raise any > dependencies issues afaic > > Yaniv Bronhaim. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Dan Kenigsberg" <dan...@redhat.com> >> To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbona...@redhat.com>, ybron...@redhat.com >> Cc: "Sven Kieske" <s.kie...@mittwald.de>, "Trey Dockendorf" >> <treyd...@gmail.com>, "users" <us...@ovirt.org>, "VDSM >> Project Development" <vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org> >> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 4:02:13 PM >> Subject: Re: [Users] ovirt-3.3.3 release postponed due to blockers >> >> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 10:27:34AM +0100, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: >>> Il 30/01/2014 10:20, Dan Kenigsberg ha scritto: >>>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 08:52:36AM +0000, Sven Kieske wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> any news regarding my questions? >>>>> >>>>> Am 29.01.2014 09:23, schrieb Sandro Bonazzola: >>>>>> Il 29/01/2014 09:21, Sven Kieske ha scritto: >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I wanted to try it the other way around, installing vdsm-python-cpopen >>>>>>> and check if it runs without python-cpopen . >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But that leads me to a question: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is there any difference between these packages beside their different >>>>>>> name? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If yes, what is the difference and which package should be installed? >>>>>>> I no, why is there a packet vdsm-python-cpopen ? >>>>>> >>>>>> CCing VDSM >>>> >>>> python-cpopen includes some improvements and bug fixes, that are going >>>> to be needed in ovirt-3.4. vdsm-python-cpopen is shipped by ovirt-3.3. >>>> >>>> python-cpopen wast intended to deprecate and replace vdsm-python-cpopen, >>>> but we have had way too many issues trying to do that properly in >>>> rpm/yum. Most of the bugs are ours, at least one is yum's. >>>> >>>> At the moment, the existence of python-cpopen in Fedora confuses `yum >>>> install vdsm`. >>>> >>>> To avoid this unfortunate delay, we can either include python-cpopen in >>>> ovirt-stable or exclude vdsm-python-cpopen from there. Both options are >>>> unfavorable, but so is continuing to wait. >>> >>> If it's enough just to add python-cpopen to ovirt-stable, I'm fine with >>> that. >>> I just need the link to the build to be included there. >> >> Yaniv, have you tried if shipping python-cpopen hides this issue? >> >> http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/python-cpopen/1.3/1.fc20/x86_64/python-cpopen-1.3-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm >> http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/python-cpopen/1.3/1.fc19/x86_64/python-cpopen-1.3-1.fc19.x86_64.rpm >> http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/python-cpopen/1.3/1.el6/ppc64/python-cpopen-1.3-1.el6.ppc64.rpm >> >> Dropping vdsm-python-cpopen from a stable version seems impolite, but >> should work, too. >> -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com _______________________________________________ vdsm-devel mailing list vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel
