* Installation order question with RPM backend @ 2012-04-11 15:14 Xu, Dongxiao 2012-04-11 15:25 ` Mark Hatle 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Xu, Dongxiao @ 2012-04-11 15:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Mark Hatle; +Cc: yocto, scott.a.garman Hi Mark, I met a strange issue while using RPM to generate the rootfs. In the installation list, if we have 2 RPM packages, say A.rpm and B.rpm. package A RDEPENDS on package B. While installing the two packages? Does RPM ensures to install B first and then install A? The real issue is: we have certain packages that need to run useradd/groupadd at rootfs time, for example, the dbus. However the useradd/groupadd bbclass RDEPENDS on base-files, which provides the /etc/group file. While installing the final image, sometimes we saw it installs dbus firstly and then base-files, causing the useradd/groupadd script error since it could not find /etc/group file. I tried ipk and it doesn't have problem since it ensures to install base-files firstly. Any comment is welcome. Thanks, Dongxiao ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Installation order question with RPM backend 2012-04-11 15:14 Installation order question with RPM backend Xu, Dongxiao @ 2012-04-11 15:25 ` Mark Hatle 2012-04-11 15:37 ` Xu, Dongxiao 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Mark Hatle @ 2012-04-11 15:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Xu, Dongxiao; +Cc: yocto, scott.a.garman On 4/11/12 10:14 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote: > Hi Mark, > > I met a strange issue while using RPM to generate the rootfs. > > In the installation list, if we have 2 RPM packages, say A.rpm and > B.rpm. package A RDEPENDS on package B. While installing the two > packages? Does RPM ensures to install B first and then install A? > > The real issue is: we have certain packages that need to run > useradd/groupadd at rootfs time, for example, the dbus. However the > useradd/groupadd bbclass RDEPENDS on base-files, which provides > the /etc/group file. While installing the final image, sometimes we saw > it installs dbus firstly and then base-files, causing the > useradd/groupadd script error since it could not find /etc/group file. it does enforce install order, however the /etc/group, /etc/passwd files (last time I checked) were being put into place by the post install scripts. The scripting order is handled somewhat independently of the package install order. (post install scripts get delayed intentionally for performance reasons. There is a way to hint a dependency for them as well...) The passwd/group files are fairly unique files, and generally are installed -first- (individually) before any other packages on most RPM installations. After that the methods and install ordering works... --Mark > I tried ipk and it doesn't have problem since it ensures to install > base-files firstly. > > Any comment is welcome. > > Thanks, > Dongxiao > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Installation order question with RPM backend 2012-04-11 15:25 ` Mark Hatle @ 2012-04-11 15:37 ` Xu, Dongxiao 2012-04-11 15:45 ` Mark Hatle 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Xu, Dongxiao @ 2012-04-11 15:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Mark Hatle; +Cc: yocto, scott.a.garman On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 10:25 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > On 4/11/12 10:14 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote: > > Hi Mark, > > > > I met a strange issue while using RPM to generate the rootfs. > > > > In the installation list, if we have 2 RPM packages, say A.rpm and > > B.rpm. package A RDEPENDS on package B. While installing the two > > packages? Does RPM ensures to install B first and then install A? > > > > The real issue is: we have certain packages that need to run > > useradd/groupadd at rootfs time, for example, the dbus. However the > > useradd/groupadd bbclass RDEPENDS on base-files, which provides > > the /etc/group file. While installing the final image, sometimes we saw > > it installs dbus firstly and then base-files, causing the > > useradd/groupadd script error since it could not find /etc/group file. > > it does enforce install order, however the /etc/group, /etc/passwd files (last > time I checked) were being put into place by the post install scripts. The > scripting order is handled somewhat independently of the package install order. > (post install scripts get delayed intentionally for performance reasons. > There is a way to hint a dependency for them as well...) > > The passwd/group files are fairly unique files, and generally are installed > -first- (individually) before any other packages on most RPM installations. > After that the methods and install ordering works... > But does the following log indicates the dbus-1 is installed before base-passwd? dbus-1 ################################################## Adding system startup for /distro/sdb/build-basic/tmp/work/qemux86-poky-linux/hob-image-hob-basic-1.0-r0/rootfs/etc/init.d/dbus-1. kernel-module-uvesafb ################################################## libusb-compat ################################################## base-passwd ################################################## Thanks, Dongxiao > --Mark > > > I tried ipk and it doesn't have problem since it ensures to install > > base-files firstly. > > > > Any comment is welcome. > > > > Thanks, > > Dongxiao > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Installation order question with RPM backend 2012-04-11 15:37 ` Xu, Dongxiao @ 2012-04-11 15:45 ` Mark Hatle 2012-04-11 15:51 ` Xu, Dongxiao 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Mark Hatle @ 2012-04-11 15:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Xu, Dongxiao; +Cc: yocto, scott.a.garman On 4/11/12 10:37 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote: > On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 10:25 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: >> On 4/11/12 10:14 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote: >>> Hi Mark, >>> >>> I met a strange issue while using RPM to generate the rootfs. >>> >>> In the installation list, if we have 2 RPM packages, say A.rpm and >>> B.rpm. package A RDEPENDS on package B. While installing the two >>> packages? Does RPM ensures to install B first and then install A? >>> >>> The real issue is: we have certain packages that need to run >>> useradd/groupadd at rootfs time, for example, the dbus. However the >>> useradd/groupadd bbclass RDEPENDS on base-files, which provides >>> the /etc/group file. While installing the final image, sometimes we saw >>> it installs dbus firstly and then base-files, causing the >>> useradd/groupadd script error since it could not find /etc/group file. >> >> it does enforce install order, however the /etc/group, /etc/passwd files (last >> time I checked) were being put into place by the post install scripts. The >> scripting order is handled somewhat independently of the package install order. >> (post install scripts get delayed intentionally for performance reasons. >> There is a way to hint a dependency for them as well...) >> >> The passwd/group files are fairly unique files, and generally are installed >> -first- (individually) before any other packages on most RPM installations. >> After that the methods and install ordering works... >> > But does the following log indicates the dbus-1 is installed before > base-passwd? > > dbus-1 ################################################## > Adding system startup > for /distro/sdb/build-basic/tmp/work/qemux86-poky-linux/hob-image-hob-basic-1.0-r0/rootfs/etc/init.d/dbus-1. > kernel-module-uvesafb ################################################## > libusb-compat ################################################## > base-passwd ################################################## Certainly appears that way.. but we'd need to look into the packages and understand the requirements as they are defined and trace them to see if there is a problem w/ the ordering or if the packages have a problem. You will often see mysterious reordering when there is a circular dependency. RPM has to break this dependency in some way, and it does it by simply choosing one or the other. (There is a hint mechanism for circular dependencies, but we've never used it.) My suggestion is lets look at the package runtime dependenices and manually trace them.. Focus on dbus-1 and base-passwd... and see if the order is right or wrong or if there is a circular dependency. (Also our version of RPM 5 is a bit old, and there are some known bugs in it.. as far as I know, none of them with the dependency resolution or code paths we follow.) --Mark > Thanks, > Dongxiao > >> --Mark >> >>> I tried ipk and it doesn't have problem since it ensures to install >>> base-files firstly. >>> >>> Any comment is welcome. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Dongxiao >>> >> > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Installation order question with RPM backend 2012-04-11 15:45 ` Mark Hatle @ 2012-04-11 15:51 ` Xu, Dongxiao 2012-04-11 15:56 ` Mark Hatle 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Xu, Dongxiao @ 2012-04-11 15:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Mark Hatle; +Cc: yocto, scott.a.garman On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 10:45 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > On 4/11/12 10:37 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 10:25 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > >> On 4/11/12 10:14 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote: > >>> Hi Mark, > >>> > >>> I met a strange issue while using RPM to generate the rootfs. > >>> > >>> In the installation list, if we have 2 RPM packages, say A.rpm and > >>> B.rpm. package A RDEPENDS on package B. While installing the two > >>> packages? Does RPM ensures to install B first and then install A? > >>> > >>> The real issue is: we have certain packages that need to run > >>> useradd/groupadd at rootfs time, for example, the dbus. However the > >>> useradd/groupadd bbclass RDEPENDS on base-files, which provides > >>> the /etc/group file. While installing the final image, sometimes we saw > >>> it installs dbus firstly and then base-files, causing the > >>> useradd/groupadd script error since it could not find /etc/group file. > >> > >> it does enforce install order, however the /etc/group, /etc/passwd files (last > >> time I checked) were being put into place by the post install scripts. The > >> scripting order is handled somewhat independently of the package install order. > >> (post install scripts get delayed intentionally for performance reasons. > >> There is a way to hint a dependency for them as well...) > >> > >> The passwd/group files are fairly unique files, and generally are installed > >> -first- (individually) before any other packages on most RPM installations. > >> After that the methods and install ordering works... > >> > > But does the following log indicates the dbus-1 is installed before > > base-passwd? > > > > dbus-1 ################################################## > > Adding system startup > > for /distro/sdb/build-basic/tmp/work/qemux86-poky-linux/hob-image-hob-basic-1.0-r0/rootfs/etc/init.d/dbus-1. > > kernel-module-uvesafb ################################################## > > libusb-compat ################################################## > > base-passwd ################################################## > > Certainly appears that way.. but we'd need to look into the packages and > understand the requirements as they are defined and trace them to see if there > is a problem w/ the ordering or if the packages have a problem. > > You will often see mysterious reordering when there is a circular dependency. > RPM has to break this dependency in some way, and it does it by simply choosing > one or the other. (There is a hint mechanism for circular dependencies, but > we've never used it.) > > My suggestion is lets look at the package runtime dependenices and manually > trace them.. Focus on dbus-1 and base-passwd... and see if the order is right > or wrong or if there is a circular dependency. I checked the dbus.spec and base-passwd.spec. For dbus.spec, there is a line: %package -n dbus-1 Requires: base-passwd And for base-passwd, there is no dbus exists in base-passwd.spec. Thanks, Dongxiao > > (Also our version of RPM 5 is a bit old, and there are some known bugs in it.. > as far as I know, none of them with the dependency resolution or code paths we > follow.) > > --Mark > > > Thanks, > > Dongxiao > > > >> --Mark > >> > >>> I tried ipk and it doesn't have problem since it ensures to install > >>> base-files firstly. > >>> > >>> Any comment is welcome. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Dongxiao > >>> > >> > > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Installation order question with RPM backend 2012-04-11 15:51 ` Xu, Dongxiao @ 2012-04-11 15:56 ` Mark Hatle 2012-04-11 16:04 ` Xu, Dongxiao 2012-04-11 16:06 ` Richard Purdie 0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Mark Hatle @ 2012-04-11 15:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Xu, Dongxiao; +Cc: yocto, scott.a.garman On 4/11/12 10:51 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote: > On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 10:45 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: >> On 4/11/12 10:37 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote: >>> On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 10:25 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: >>>> On 4/11/12 10:14 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote: >>>>> Hi Mark, >>>>> >>>>> I met a strange issue while using RPM to generate the rootfs. >>>>> >>>>> In the installation list, if we have 2 RPM packages, say A.rpm and >>>>> B.rpm. package A RDEPENDS on package B. While installing the two >>>>> packages? Does RPM ensures to install B first and then install A? >>>>> >>>>> The real issue is: we have certain packages that need to run >>>>> useradd/groupadd at rootfs time, for example, the dbus. However the >>>>> useradd/groupadd bbclass RDEPENDS on base-files, which provides >>>>> the /etc/group file. While installing the final image, sometimes we saw >>>>> it installs dbus firstly and then base-files, causing the >>>>> useradd/groupadd script error since it could not find /etc/group file. >>>> >>>> it does enforce install order, however the /etc/group, /etc/passwd files (last >>>> time I checked) were being put into place by the post install scripts. The >>>> scripting order is handled somewhat independently of the package install order. >>>> (post install scripts get delayed intentionally for performance reasons. >>>> There is a way to hint a dependency for them as well...) >>>> >>>> The passwd/group files are fairly unique files, and generally are installed >>>> -first- (individually) before any other packages on most RPM installations. >>>> After that the methods and install ordering works... >>>> >>> But does the following log indicates the dbus-1 is installed before >>> base-passwd? >>> >>> dbus-1 ################################################## >>> Adding system startup >>> for /distro/sdb/build-basic/tmp/work/qemux86-poky-linux/hob-image-hob-basic-1.0-r0/rootfs/etc/init.d/dbus-1. >>> kernel-module-uvesafb ################################################## >>> libusb-compat ################################################## >>> base-passwd ################################################## >> >> Certainly appears that way.. but we'd need to look into the packages and >> understand the requirements as they are defined and trace them to see if there >> is a problem w/ the ordering or if the packages have a problem. >> >> You will often see mysterious reordering when there is a circular dependency. >> RPM has to break this dependency in some way, and it does it by simply choosing >> one or the other. (There is a hint mechanism for circular dependencies, but >> we've never used it.) >> >> My suggestion is lets look at the package runtime dependenices and manually >> trace them.. Focus on dbus-1 and base-passwd... and see if the order is right >> or wrong or if there is a circular dependency. > > I checked the dbus.spec and base-passwd.spec. > For dbus.spec, there is a line: > > %package -n dbus-1 > Requires: base-passwd > > And for base-passwd, there is no dbus exists in base-passwd.spec. You need to query the binary packages for the real values.. rpm -qp <package> --requires (and --provides will show what it provides..) then match those two up.. If you still don't come across some type of circular dependency, then let me know.. I'll start investigating further. (there is additional dependency resolution debugging I can enable, but it's difficult to explain how to interpret the tons of lines..) --Mark > Thanks, > Dongxiao > >> >> (Also our version of RPM 5 is a bit old, and there are some known bugs in it.. >> as far as I know, none of them with the dependency resolution or code paths we >> follow.) >> >> --Mark >> >>> Thanks, >>> Dongxiao >>> >>>> --Mark >>>> >>>>> I tried ipk and it doesn't have problem since it ensures to install >>>>> base-files firstly. >>>>> >>>>> Any comment is welcome. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Dongxiao >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Installation order question with RPM backend 2012-04-11 15:56 ` Mark Hatle @ 2012-04-11 16:04 ` Xu, Dongxiao 2012-04-11 16:06 ` Richard Purdie 1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Xu, Dongxiao @ 2012-04-11 16:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Mark Hatle; +Cc: yocto, scott.a.garman On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 10:56 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > On 4/11/12 10:51 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 10:45 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > >> On 4/11/12 10:37 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote: > >>> On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 10:25 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > >>>> On 4/11/12 10:14 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote: > >>>>> Hi Mark, > >>>>> > >>>>> I met a strange issue while using RPM to generate the rootfs. > >>>>> > >>>>> In the installation list, if we have 2 RPM packages, say A.rpm and > >>>>> B.rpm. package A RDEPENDS on package B. While installing the two > >>>>> packages? Does RPM ensures to install B first and then install A? > >>>>> > >>>>> The real issue is: we have certain packages that need to run > >>>>> useradd/groupadd at rootfs time, for example, the dbus. However the > >>>>> useradd/groupadd bbclass RDEPENDS on base-files, which provides > >>>>> the /etc/group file. While installing the final image, sometimes we saw > >>>>> it installs dbus firstly and then base-files, causing the > >>>>> useradd/groupadd script error since it could not find /etc/group file. > >>>> > >>>> it does enforce install order, however the /etc/group, /etc/passwd files (last > >>>> time I checked) were being put into place by the post install scripts. The > >>>> scripting order is handled somewhat independently of the package install order. > >>>> (post install scripts get delayed intentionally for performance reasons. > >>>> There is a way to hint a dependency for them as well...) > >>>> > >>>> The passwd/group files are fairly unique files, and generally are installed > >>>> -first- (individually) before any other packages on most RPM installations. > >>>> After that the methods and install ordering works... > >>>> > >>> But does the following log indicates the dbus-1 is installed before > >>> base-passwd? > >>> > >>> dbus-1 ################################################## > >>> Adding system startup > >>> for /distro/sdb/build-basic/tmp/work/qemux86-poky-linux/hob-image-hob-basic-1.0-r0/rootfs/etc/init.d/dbus-1. > >>> kernel-module-uvesafb ################################################## > >>> libusb-compat ################################################## > >>> base-passwd ################################################## > >> > >> Certainly appears that way.. but we'd need to look into the packages and > >> understand the requirements as they are defined and trace them to see if there > >> is a problem w/ the ordering or if the packages have a problem. > >> > >> You will often see mysterious reordering when there is a circular dependency. > >> RPM has to break this dependency in some way, and it does it by simply choosing > >> one or the other. (There is a hint mechanism for circular dependencies, but > >> we've never used it.) > >> > >> My suggestion is lets look at the package runtime dependenices and manually > >> trace them.. Focus on dbus-1 and base-passwd... and see if the order is right > >> or wrong or if there is a circular dependency. > > > > I checked the dbus.spec and base-passwd.spec. > > For dbus.spec, there is a line: > > > > %package -n dbus-1 > > Requires: base-passwd > > > > And for base-passwd, there is no dbus exists in base-passwd.spec. > > You need to query the binary packages for the real values.. > > rpm -qp <package> --requires Here I pasted the command output. I think there is no circular dependency here. It is relatively easy to reproduce this rootfs error: For a certain image bb file, say task-core-basic. Change the definition of the installation package with the following line: PACKAGE_INSTALL = "task-core-basic task-core-ssh-openssh task-core-apps-console task-core-boot" # bitbake core-image-basic Then you will see the useradd/groupadd error and the dependency order issue. Thanks, Dongxiao dongxiao@dongxiao-osel:/distro/sdb/build-basic/tmp/deploy/rpm/i586$ rpm -qp base-passwd-3.5.24-r0.i586.rpm --requires warning: base-passwd-3.5.24-r0.i586.rpm: Header V4 DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID a8d359bb: NOKEY /bin/sh dongxiao@dongxiao-osel:/distro/sdb/build-basic/tmp/deploy/rpm/i586$ rpm -qp dbus-1-1.4.16-r3.0.i586.rpm --requires warning: dbus-1-1.4.16-r3.0.i586.rpm: Header V4 DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID 2c60056d: NOKEY update-rc.d libdbus-1-3 >= 1.4.16 libc6 >= 2.13 shadow libexpat1 >= 2.0.1 base-passwd /bin/sh /bin/sh /bin/sh /bin/sh /bin/sh rtld(GNU_HASH) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.10) libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.0) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.9) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2) librt.so.1 librt.so.1(GLIBC_2.2) libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.2) libpthread.so.0 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.4) libexpat.so.1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.2) libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) libdbus-1.so.3 > > (and --provides will show what it provides..) then match those two up.. If you > still don't come across some type of circular dependency, then let me know.. > I'll start investigating further. (there is additional dependency resolution > debugging I can enable, but it's difficult to explain how to interpret the tons > of lines..) > > --Mark > > > Thanks, > > Dongxiao > > > >> > >> (Also our version of RPM 5 is a bit old, and there are some known bugs in it.. > >> as far as I know, none of them with the dependency resolution or code paths we > >> follow.) > >> > >> --Mark > >> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Dongxiao > >>> > >>>> --Mark > >>>> > >>>>> I tried ipk and it doesn't have problem since it ensures to install > >>>>> base-files firstly. > >>>>> > >>>>> Any comment is welcome. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> Dongxiao > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Installation order question with RPM backend 2012-04-11 15:56 ` Mark Hatle 2012-04-11 16:04 ` Xu, Dongxiao @ 2012-04-11 16:06 ` Richard Purdie 1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Richard Purdie @ 2012-04-11 16:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Mark Hatle; +Cc: yocto, scott.a.garman On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 10:56 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > On 4/11/12 10:51 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 10:45 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > >> On 4/11/12 10:37 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote: > >>> On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 10:25 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > >>>> On 4/11/12 10:14 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote: > >>>>> Hi Mark, > >>>>> > >>>>> I met a strange issue while using RPM to generate the rootfs. > >>>>> > >>>>> In the installation list, if we have 2 RPM packages, say A.rpm and > >>>>> B.rpm. package A RDEPENDS on package B. While installing the two > >>>>> packages? Does RPM ensures to install B first and then install A? > >>>>> > >>>>> The real issue is: we have certain packages that need to run > >>>>> useradd/groupadd at rootfs time, for example, the dbus. However the > >>>>> useradd/groupadd bbclass RDEPENDS on base-files, which provides > >>>>> the /etc/group file. While installing the final image, sometimes we saw > >>>>> it installs dbus firstly and then base-files, causing the > >>>>> useradd/groupadd script error since it could not find /etc/group file. > >>>> > >>>> it does enforce install order, however the /etc/group, /etc/passwd files (last > >>>> time I checked) were being put into place by the post install scripts. The > >>>> scripting order is handled somewhat independently of the package install order. > >>>> (post install scripts get delayed intentionally for performance reasons. > >>>> There is a way to hint a dependency for them as well...) > >>>> > >>>> The passwd/group files are fairly unique files, and generally are installed > >>>> -first- (individually) before any other packages on most RPM installations. > >>>> After that the methods and install ordering works... > >>>> > >>> But does the following log indicates the dbus-1 is installed before > >>> base-passwd? > >>> > >>> dbus-1 ################################################## > >>> Adding system startup > >>> for /distro/sdb/build-basic/tmp/work/qemux86-poky-linux/hob-image-hob-basic-1.0-r0/rootfs/etc/init.d/dbus-1. > >>> kernel-module-uvesafb ################################################## > >>> libusb-compat ################################################## > >>> base-passwd ################################################## > >> > >> Certainly appears that way.. but we'd need to look into the packages and > >> understand the requirements as they are defined and trace them to see if there > >> is a problem w/ the ordering or if the packages have a problem. > >> > >> You will often see mysterious reordering when there is a circular dependency. > >> RPM has to break this dependency in some way, and it does it by simply choosing > >> one or the other. (There is a hint mechanism for circular dependencies, but > >> we've never used it.) > >> > >> My suggestion is lets look at the package runtime dependenices and manually > >> trace them.. Focus on dbus-1 and base-passwd... and see if the order is right > >> or wrong or if there is a circular dependency. > > > > I checked the dbus.spec and base-passwd.spec. > > For dbus.spec, there is a line: > > > > %package -n dbus-1 > > Requires: base-passwd > > > > And for base-passwd, there is no dbus exists in base-passwd.spec. > > You need to query the binary packages for the real values.. > > rpm -qp <package> --requires > > (and --provides will show what it provides..) then match those two up.. If you > still don't come across some type of circular dependency, then let me know.. > I'll start investigating further. (there is additional dependency resolution > debugging I can enable, but it's difficult to explain how to interpret the tons > of lines..) Let me jump in here since I've looked at the rpm code paths in question before. RPM basically works its way through the install manifest so if you have for example: base-passwd shadow dbus-1 libc then base-passwd and shadow will "stall" their installation until their dependency on libc is satisfied. Previously, we thought it was good enough to put base-passwd and shadow at the top but its now becoming clear we need all their dependencies at the top too. There are other ongoing discussions about the best way to fix this. There are failures on the autobuilder at the moment related to it. Cheers, Richard ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-04-11 16:07 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2012-04-11 15:14 Installation order question with RPM backend Xu, Dongxiao 2012-04-11 15:25 ` Mark Hatle 2012-04-11 15:37 ` Xu, Dongxiao 2012-04-11 15:45 ` Mark Hatle 2012-04-11 15:51 ` Xu, Dongxiao 2012-04-11 15:56 ` Mark Hatle 2012-04-11 16:04 ` Xu, Dongxiao 2012-04-11 16:06 ` Richard Purdie
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.