Bug 14024

Summary: 5a2: Installation failed: file /usr/sbin/ppp-watch
Product: Mageia Reporter: Bit Twister <bittwister2>
Component: RPM PackagesAssignee: Colin Guthrie <mageia>
Status: RESOLVED FIXED QA Contact:
Severity: normal    
Priority: Normal    
Version: Cauldron   
Target Milestone: ---   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Source RPM: CVE:
Status comment:

Description Bit Twister 2014-09-01 01:14:41 CEST
Description of problem:

Installation failed:    file /usr/sbin/ppp-watch from install of ppp-2.4.7-2.mga5.x86_64 conflicts with file from package initscripts-9.41-22.mga5.x86_64

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible: Always


Steps to Reproduce:
1. clean install 
2. Mageia-5-alpha2-x86_64-DVD.iso
3. urpmi --downloader wget --auto --auto-update --test
4. urpmi --downloader wget --auto --auto-update


Reproducible: 

Steps to Reproduce:
Comment 1 David Walser 2014-09-01 15:54:13 CEST
Thanks for the report.

Colin, you forgot to add the proper conflicts when you moved this file to the ppp package.  In fact, the Requires you addded on initscripts (while I would think it should also solve the issue if there's no dependency loops) are probably not necessary.

Assignee: bugsquad => mageia

Comment 2 Colin Guthrie 2014-09-01 16:14:10 CEST
The Requires I added was meant to avoid this :(, but I guess it would actually need to be a Requires(pre) if that were to work. I can make it Conflict instead. I was a bit paranoid about submitting this to the BS as I thought I might create some kind of loop!

Should be fine now initscripts is built tho'.
Comment 3 Colin Guthrie 2014-09-01 16:15:56 CEST
OK, should be fine in the next ppp build.

Status: NEW => RESOLVED
Resolution: (none) => FIXED

Comment 4 Bit Twister 2014-09-01 17:33:13 CEST
(In reply to Colin Guthrie from comment #3)
> OK, should be fine in the next ppp build.


initscripts < 9.55 conflicts with ppp-2.4.7-3.mga5.x86_64

Status: RESOLVED => REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED => (none)

Comment 5 Colin Guthrie 2014-09-01 18:39:18 CEST
(In reply to Bit Twister from comment #4)
> (In reply to Colin Guthrie from comment #3)
> > OK, should be fine in the next ppp build.
> 
> 
> initscripts < 9.55 conflicts with ppp-2.4.7-3.mga5.x86_64

Sorry, I don't follow your statement.

It's intentional that ppp-2.4.7-3.mga5.x86_64 conflicts with initscripts < 9.55...

Can you clarify what I'm missing here?
Comment 6 Bit Twister 2014-09-01 19:27:34 CEST
(In reply to Colin Guthrie from comment #5)
> (In reply to Bit Twister from comment #4)
> > (In reply to Colin Guthrie from comment #3)
> > > OK, should be fine in the next ppp build.
> > 
> > 
> > initscripts < 9.55 conflicts with ppp-2.4.7-3.mga5.x86_64
> 
> Sorry, I don't follow your statement.
> 
> It's intentional that ppp-2.4.7-3.mga5.x86_64 conflicts with initscripts <
> 9.55...
> 
> Can you clarify what I'm missing here?

Guessing you will have to clarify what I need to do to get whatever fixed.

networkmanager-0.9.10.0-3.mga5.x86_64.rpm will not upgrade because of ppp dependency.

Neither ppp-2.4.7-2.mga5.x86_64.rpm or ppp-2.4.7-3.mga5.x86_64.rpm will install.
Do we close this bug and I open an initscripts bug or networkmanager or what?
Comment 7 Colin Guthrie 2014-09-01 19:53:36 CEST
Oh wait, I see. The conflicts in the initscripts package is on "ppp <= 2.4.5-7" which is meant to be the version in mga4, but I typo'ed it and it should be 17, not 7).

I need to make it conflict on "ppp <= 2.4.7-2" instead. I think that's what you're getting at right?

(FYI, I didn't see this problem on my machine as initscripts had already been updated and indeed, it should be fine when updating mga4 -> mga5, but it does break cauldron->cauldron upgrades for no good reason - this is why I didn't understand your previous message).
Comment 8 Colin Guthrie 2014-09-01 19:55:08 CEST
(In reply to Colin Guthrie from comment #7)
> Oh wait, I see. The conflicts in the initscripts package is on "ppp <=
> 2.4.5-7" which is meant to be the version in mga4, but I typo'ed it and it
> should be 17, not 7).

Actually, this is not true. I *did* put the right conflicts in but there were two conflicts definitions here and the first (older) one won!

Fixing now.
Comment 9 Colin Guthrie 2014-09-01 20:02:48 CEST
Let me know if it's OK with the next initscripts build?

Thanks!
Comment 10 Bit Twister 2014-09-01 21:05:33 CEST
Ok, I get a clean update now.
Thank you for your time.

Status: REOPENED => RESOLVED
Resolution: (none) => FIXED