DevHeads.net

package downgrades from f28 to f29

Hi all,

I tried upgrading my system to f29, and I noticed some packages that
would have been downgraded. Upon further investigation, their
maintainers seem to have forgotten (or missed) to build and/or submit
updates for these packages to fedora 29 - so, for example, the newer
version is only available on f28 and rawhide, but f29 is stuck on an
older version.

- gd (missing f29 update in bodhi, but koji build is present)
- pipewire (missing f29 update in bodhi, but koji build is present)
- rng-tools (missing both a koji build and bodhi update for f29)

Those three are just the ones that happen to be installed on my
system, probably there are more of these "older on the newer fedora
release" packages.

I haven't been able to find the documentation for this, but I seem to
remember that package versions should always be higher in newer fedora
releases (so there are no downgrades when upgrading from N to N+1). Is
this what is referred to as a "broken upgrade path"?

Fabio

Comments

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

By Kamil Paral at 10/10/2018 - 08:45

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:59 PM Fabio Valentini < ... at gmail dot com>
wrote:

That policy has been cancelled. Since the upgrade tools started doing
basically "dnf distrosync (--allowerasing)" for upgrades, the upgrade path
between distros stopped being a major issue and the policy has been dropped.

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

By Jason L Tibbitts III at 10/10/2018 - 18:40

KP> That policy has been cancelled. Since the upgrade tools started
KP> doing basically "dnf distrosync (--allowerasing)" for upgrades, the
KP> upgrade path between distros stopped being a major issue and the
KP> policy has been dropped.

If this is true then it's a rather huge change that should be announced
pretty loudly. After all, if we no longer care about ordering between
releases, then we are able to both drop Epoch: tags and remove the
extraneous 'c' from the dist tag. (With the slight caveat that rawhide
users need to use distro-sync at some point.)

- J<

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

By Matthew Miller at 10/11/2018 - 13:53

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 06:40:38PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
Even if we drop the policy as a blocker, I think we should still have a
general policy that, absent a "fixing the epoch problem" issue, people get
_warnings_ when they've updated on order release to newer than the newer
one.

Maybe bodhi is the right place for that? Dunno.

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

By King InuYasha at 10/10/2018 - 21:57

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 7:41 PM Jason L Tibbitts III < ... at math dot uh.edu> wrote:
I'd personally love to be able to start resetting Epochs. There's no
reason for them to persist beyond a release.

I dunno if I'd be happy with losing `fc`, though. It's grown on me... :P

We still have tons of references to Fedora Extras in our infra too
(just look at most of our tracker bug labels!).

I wonder if we now have more people in Fedora that came after the
Core/Extras merge than before it...?

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

By Matthew Miller at 10/11/2018 - 10:08

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 10:57:20PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
Yes, I think that's the case. It's been a long time!

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

By =?utf-8?q?Jos=C... at 10/10/2018 - 09:50

On Wednesday, 10 October 2018 14.45.22 WEST Kamil Paral wrote:
Even so the problem described seems to be related with packages that were not
build for F29 by mistake (probably around the time that F29 was branched from
rawhide August 14). If the same nvr exists in F28 and rawhide it is difficult
to come with a reason why it does happen the same for F29.

So even if it not a policy it would be nice to have those cases highlighted to
fix possible mistakes. A report like those that we get both here or in the
test mailing list.

Regards, :-)

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

By David Timms at 10/10/2018 - 15:34

On 11/10/18 01:50, José Abílio Matos wrote:
Given Fedora runs on community power, have you tried rebuilding the
packages that interest you under f29 to see/fix any problems that arise ?
You can also use the web tools to see what the current rpm spec and
builds have been requested, and if any new freshness bugs are in bugzilla.
The maintainer may very well appreciate your assistance.

Dave.

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

By =?utf-8?q?Jos=C... at 10/13/2018 - 10:58

On Wednesday, 10 October 2018 21.34.47 WEST David Timms wrote:
Yes. As long as the time that I available allows.

Dave I can understand the purpose of your message but IMHO it fails the point
of this thread.

Some releases ago I have updated one package in the two supported stable
releases (F-(n-2) and F-(n-1)) while the moving of updates to stable from the
soon to be released F-n versions were frozen (just like they are now).

Of course I could have remembered that and have delayed the update until the
ban to move packages to stable was lifted, ensuring then that the upgrade path
between releases is always working. It was my mistake, I got a notice that the
updates to versions F-(n-2) and F-(n-1) were ready to go to stable, the
feedback was positive and thus I pushed then to stable.

The corollary of this thread and of the previous story is that I think that
the tools that we use to issue updates should help us detect those corner
cases where the update path is broken.

Regards, :-)

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

By Germano Massullo at 10/10/2018 - 09:32

Il giorno mer 10 ott 2018 alle ore 15:46 Kamil Paral
< ... at redhat dot com> ha scritto:
Do we have an URL reference where we can read more about?

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

By Kamil Paral at 10/10/2018 - 11:05

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 4:33 PM Germano Massullo <germano. ... at gmail dot com>
wrote:

I'm not sure whether the policy was actually written somewhere in the past.
But we used to have automated "upgradepath" check, which was requested to
get dropped in this ticket:
<a href="https://pagure.io/taskotron/taskotron-trigger/issue/45" title="https://pagure.io/taskotron/taskotron-trigger/issue/45">https://pagure.io/taskotron/taskotron-trigger/issue/45</a>

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

By =?UTF-8?Q?Micha... at 10/10/2018 - 07:56

Shouldn't this be caused by F29 final freeze?

On 10.10.2018 13:57, Fabio Valentini wrote:

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

By Fabio Valentini at 10/10/2018 - 08:10

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 2:57 PM Michal Konečný < ... at redhat dot com> wrote:
Not necessarily. The freeze went into effect only yesterday, so it's
not that (yet).

The specific packages I listed don't have newer versions available,
even in f29-updates-testing.
As I said, it looks like some maintainers forgot about f29 bodhi
updates and/or even koji builds (probably it happened shortly after
the branch point or after bodhi activation point).

Fabio

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

By Chuck Anderson at 10/10/2018 - 08:35

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 03:10:23PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
This happens for every release. They'll catch up eventually.

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

By Germano Massullo at 10/10/2018 - 07:48

Il giorno mer 10 ott 2018 alle ore 13:58 Fabio Valentini
< ... at gmail dot com> ha scritto:
Exactly