<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">This was an interesting one.</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">We have been building
librados2-13.2.2-0.el7.tis.25.x86_64.rpm as part of the distro
layer for some time.<br>
<br>
A recent update added librados2-13.2.10-0.el7.x86_64.rpm to the
lst of the flock layer.<br>
<br>
Now build-iso preferres locally built packages over downloaded
ones, even if the downloaded on is of higher version. Now that
policy is open for debate, but that is what it does.<br>
<br>
Monolithic build uses the lst files of all layers, but having
built librados2-13.2.2-0.el7.tis.25.x86_64.rpm, it selects
librados2-13.2.2-0.el7.tis.25.x86_64.rpm over
librados2-13.2.10-0.el7.x86_64.rpm when building the iso.<br>
<br>
Flock layer build, downloads
librados2-13.2.2-0.el7.tis.25.x86_64.rpm from the distro layer
build. It doesn't build it itself. The downloads from the two
sources are lumped into a common repo, so it has no reason to
prefer the lower versioned rpm. It selects
librados2-13.2.10-0.el7.x86_64.rpm.<br>
<br>
The final piece of the puzzle is the transitive list of requires
for librados2-13.2.10-0.el7.x86_64.rpm. It has a new dependency
that pulls in lttng-ust-2.10.0-1.el7.x86_64.rpm, which in turn
needs userspace-rcu-0.10.0-3.el7.x86_64.rpm, which is not
present. It's wasn't included in the recent lst file changes that
added librados2-13.2.10-0.el7.x86_64.rpm.<br>
<br>
A flock layer build-iso should have caught this. I suspect
build-iso was only performed on a monolithic build. <br>
<br>
Open questions.<br>
1) Is there a need to move to librados2-13.2.10 from
librados2-13.2.2. If yes, do we still need whatever modifications
were applied to librados2-13.2.2? Do they need to be ported to
librados2-13.2.10 , or can we drop librados2 from the set of
packages we have patches against?<br>
<br>
2) For build-iso... should we prefer locally built packages even
though there is a higher package named in an lst? If yes, then
layered build needs apply the local first policy accross layers.
Alternatively, perhaps drop the local first policy, but add an
audit tool to detect when a locally built package is being masked
in this way. <br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Scott</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2020-06-02 10:30 p.m.,
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:build.starlingx@gmail.com">build.starlingx@gmail.com</a> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:2072851777.1587.1591151446912.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Project: STX_build_layer_flock_master_master
Build #: 132
Status: Still Failing
Timestamp: 20200603T020359Z
Check logs at:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200603T020359Z/logs">http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/starlingx/master/centos/flock/20200603T020359Z/logs</a>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parameters
FULL_BUILD: false
FORCE_BUILD: false</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Starlingx-discuss mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io">Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss">http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>