[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: fedora-devel-list
Subject: Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides
From: Radek Holy <rholy () redhat ! com>
Date: 2015-06-12 8:55:14
Message-ID: 705480210.14703854.1434099314729.JavaMail.zimbra () redhat ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sandro Mani" <manisandro@gmail.com>
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
> <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 10:40:40 AM
> Subject: Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides
> On 12.06.2015 10:28, Radek Holy wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
>
> > > From: "Sandro Mani" <manisandro@gmail.com>
> >
>
> > > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
> > > <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>
> >
>
> > > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 6:01:12 PM
> >
>
> > > Subject: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides
> >
>
> > > Hello,
> >
>
> > > Investigating bug #1230838, I noticed that when installing mmg3d-libs,
> > > dnf
> > > installs Konsole output ptscotch-mpich, whereas yum-deprecated installs
> > > scotch. Both scotch and ptscotch-mpich provide the required
> > > libscotch.so.0()(64bit), albeit one in /usr/lib64/ and the other one in
> > > /usr/lib64/mpich/lib/:
> >
>
> > > $ dnf repoquery --requires mmg3d-libs
> >
>
> > > [...]
> >
>
> > > libscotch.so.0()(64bit)
> >
>
> > > libscotcherr.so.0()(64bit)
> >
>
> > > [...]
> >
>
> > > $ dnf provides 'libscotch.so.0()(64bit)'
> >
>
> > > ptscotch-mpich-6.0.4-2.fc23.x86_64 : PT-Scotch libraries compiled against
> > > mpich
> >
>
> > > Repo : rawhide
> >
>
> > > ptscotch-openmpi-6.0.4-2.fc23.x86_64 : PT-Scotch libraries compiled
> > > against
> > > openmpi
> >
>
> > > Repo : rawhide
> >
>
> > > scotch-6.0.4-2.fc23.x86_64 : Graph, mesh and hypergraph partitioning
> > > library
> >
>
> > > Repo : rawhide
> >
>
> > > Konsole output $ dnf repoquery -l scotch.x86_64 | grep libscotch.so.0
> >
>
> > > /usr/lib64/libscotch.so.0
> >
>
> > > /usr/lib64/libscotch.so.0.2
> >
>
> > > Konsole output $ dnf repoquery -l ptscotch-mpich.x86_64 | grep
> > > libscotch.so.0
> >
>
> > > /usr/lib64/mpich/lib/libscotch.so.0
> >
>
> > > /usr/lib64/mpich/lib/libscotch.so.0.2
> >
>
> > > $ dnf install mmg3d-libs
> >
>
> > > [...]
> >
>
> > > Installing:
> >
>
> > > environment-modules x86_64 3.2.10-14.fc23 rawhide 117 k
> >
>
> > > hwloc-libs x86_64 1.10.1-2.fc23 rawhide 1.3 M
> >
>
> > > lzma-libs x86_64 4.32.7-13.fc22 rawhide 38 k
> >
>
> > > mmg3d-libs x86_64 4.0.2-1.fc23 rawhide 211 k
> >
>
> > > mpich x86_64 3.1.4-3.fc23 rawhide 1.1 M
> >
>
> > > ptscotch-mpich
> >
>
> > > $ yum-deprecated install mmg3d-libs
> >
>
> > > [...]
> >
>
> > > Installing:
> >
>
> > > mmg3d-libs x86_64 4.0.2-1.fc23 rawhide 211 k
> >
>
> > > Installing for dependencies:
> >
>
> > > lzma-libs x86_64 4.32.7-13.fc22 rawhide 38 k
> >
>
> > > scotch
> >
>
> > > So, whose fault is this? Packaging of dnf? Nothing relevant for this
> > > caught
> > > my eye skimming through the packaging guidelines.
> >
>
> > > And related: trying to install some $pkg-openmpi package, I don't
> > > generally
> > > see packages enforcing that the -openmpi version of some dependency
> > > library
> > > is installed as opposed to just the regular libs package. Should such
> > > requires need to be stated explicitly?
> >
>
> > > Thanks,
> >
>
> > > Sandro
> >
>
> > > --
> >
>
> > > devel mailing list
> >
>
> > > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> >
>
> > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
>
> > > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
> >
>
> > If a package "Requires: foo" and both "bar" and "barbaz" "Provides: foo",
> > they are handled as being equally suitable. DNF/libsolv is not going to
> > prefer packages with shorter names.
>
> So what is the solution in this situation? This seems to be a change in
> behaviour compared to yum, and it potentially affects a number of packages
> (in particular $pkg vs $pkg-openmpi, $pkg-mpich). I suppose (as an immediate
> solution at least), all such Requires need to be stated explicitly in the
> package?
> Thanks,
> Sandro
Is "scotch" *required* or just *preferred* over "ptscotch-mpich" and by whom?
--
Radek Holý
Associate Software Engineer
Software Management Team
Red Hat Czech
[Attachment #5 (text/html)]
<html><body><div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; \
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000"><div><br></div><div><br></div><hr \
id="zwchr"><blockquote style="border-left:2px solid \
#1010FF;margin-left:5px;padding-left:5px;color:#000;font-weight:normal;font-style:norm \
al;text-decoration:none;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;"><b>From: \
</b>"Sandro Mani" <manisandro@gmail.com><br><b>To: </b>"Development discussions \
related to Fedora" <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org><br><b>Sent: </b>Friday, June \
12, 2015 10:40:40 AM<br><b>Subject: </b>Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi \
having same provides<br><div><br></div>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12.06.2015 10:28, Radek Holy wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:1261771877.14695014.1434097710461.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<hr id="zwchr">
<blockquote style="border-left:2px solid
#1010FF;margin-left:5px;padding-left:5px;color:#000;font-weight:normal;font-style:norm \
al;text-decoration:none;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;"><b>From:
</b>"Sandro Mani" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" \
href="mailto:manisandro@gmail.com" \
target="_blank"><manisandro@gmail.com></a><br> <b>To: </b>"Development \
discussions related to Fedora"
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" \
href="mailto:devel@lists.fedoraproject.org" \
target="_blank"><devel@lists.fedoraproject.org></a><br> <b>Sent: </b>Thursday, \
June 11, 2015 6:01:12 PM<br> <b>Subject: </b>DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, \
$pkg-openmpi having same provides<br>
<div><br>
</div>
Hello,<br>
<br>
Investigating bug #1230838, I noticed that when installing
mmg3d-libs, dnf installs
<title>Konsole output</title>
ptscotch-mpich, whereas yum-deprecated installs scotch. Both
scotch and ptscotch-mpich provide the required
libscotch.so.0()(64bit), albeit one in /usr/lib64/ and the
other one in /usr/lib64/mpich/lib/:<br>
<br>
$ dnf repoquery --requires mmg3d-libs<br>
[...]<br>
libscotch.so.0()(64bit)<br>
libscotcherr.so.0()(64bit)<br>
[...]<br>
<br>
<br>
$ dnf provides 'libscotch.so.0()(64bit)'<br>
ptscotch-mpich-6.0.4-2.fc23.x86_64 : PT-Scotch libraries
compiled against mpich<br>
Repo : rawhide<br>
<br>
ptscotch-openmpi-6.0.4-2.fc23.x86_64 : PT-Scotch libraries
compiled against openmpi<br>
Repo : rawhide<br>
<br>
scotch-6.0.4-2.fc23.x86_64 : Graph, mesh and hypergraph
partitioning library<br>
Repo : rawhide<br>
<br>
<br>
<title>Konsole output</title>
$ dnf repoquery -l scotch.x86_64 | grep libscotch.so.0<br>
/usr/lib64/libscotch.so.0<br>
/usr/lib64/libscotch.so.0.2 <br>
<br>
<br>
<title>Konsole output</title>
$ dnf repoquery -l ptscotch-mpich.x86_64 | grep libscotch.so.0<br>
/usr/lib64/mpich/lib/libscotch.so.0<br>
/usr/lib64/mpich/lib/libscotch.so.0.2<br>
<br>
<br>
$ dnf install mmg3d-libs<br>
[...]<br>
Installing:<br>
environment-modules
x86_64 \
3.2.10-14.fc23
rawhide \
117 k<br> hwloc-libs   \
;
x86_64 \
1.10.1-2.fc23
rawhide \
1.3 M<br> lzma-libs \
x86_64 \
4.32.7-13.fc22
rawhide \
38 k<br> mmg3d-libs \
x86_64 \
4.0.2-1.fc23
rawhide \
211 k<br> mpich &nbs \
p;
x86_64 \
3.1.4-3.fc23
rawhide \
1.1 M<br> ptscotch-mpich <br>
<br>
$ yum-deprecated install mmg3d-libs<br>
[...]<br>
Installing:<br>
mmg3d-libs \
x86_64
4.0.2-1.fc23
rawhide \
211 k<br> Installing for dependencies:<br>
lzma-libs \
x86_64
4.32.7-13.fc22
rawhide \
38 k<br> scotch<br>
<br>
<br>
So, whose fault is this? Packaging of dnf? Nothing relevant
for this caught my eye skimming through the packaging
guidelines.<br>
<br>
And related: trying to install some $pkg-openmpi package, I
don't generally see packages enforcing that the -openmpi
version of some dependency library is installed as opposed to
just the regular libs package. Should such requires need to be
stated explicitly?<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Sandro<br>
<br>
-- <br>
devel mailing list<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" \
href="mailto:devel@lists.fedoraproject.org" \
target="_blank">devel@lists.fedoraproject.org</a><br> <a \
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" \
href="https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel" \
target="_blank">https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel</a><br> \
Fedora Code of Conduct: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" \
href="http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct" \
target="_blank">http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct</a><br \
data-mce-bogus="1"></blockquote> <div><br>
If a package "Requires: foo" and both "bar" and "barbaz"
"Provides: foo", they are handled as being equally suitable.
DNF/libsolv is not going to prefer packages with shorter
names.<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
So what is the solution in this situation? This seems to be a change
in behaviour compared to yum, and it potentially affects a number of
packages (in particular $pkg vs $pkg-openmpi, $pkg-mpich). I suppose
(as an immediate solution at least), all such Requires need to be
stated explicitly in the package?<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Sandro<br>
<br></blockquote><div>Is "scotch" *required* or just *preferred* over \
"ptscotch-mpich" and by whom?<br></div><div>-- <br></div><div><span \
name="x"></span>Radek Holý<br>Associate Software Engineer<br>Software Management \
Team<br>Red Hat Czech<span name="x"></span><br></div></div></body></html>
[Attachment #6 (text/plain)]
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic