[openstack-dev] [all][infra] Binary Package Dependencies - not only for Python

Clark Boylan cboylan at sapwetik.org
Fri Dec 9 23:06:19 UTC 2016


On Fri, Dec 9, 2016, at 01:42 PM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
> Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrachys at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2016-10-04 18:22:10 +0200 (+0200), Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
> >> [...]
> >>> When I execute 'bindep test’ locally, I get the following error on  
> >>> centos7.2
> >>> which is expected:
> >>>
> >>> Bad versions of installed packages:
> >>>     sqlite version 3.7.17-8.el7 does not match >=3.8
> >>>
> >>> I would think that this output is passed to apt-get in the gate. But  
> >>> then I
> >>> see the following failure in gate:
> >>>
> >>> http://logs.openstack.org/06/381906/3/check/gate-neutron-pep8-ubuntu-xenial/148dcd8/console.html#_2016-10-04_15_57_36_846699
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> We hashed this out just now in #openstack-infra, but the quick
> >> summary is that version specifiers with bindep are sort of
> >> experimental. They were added as part of its initial design but the
> >> first implementation was dpkg-only and made some assumptions about
> >> how distros track available vs installed package versions that
> >> couldn't easily be extended to other platforms. As a result, when we
> >> started adding rpm (and then later emerge) support, we pretty much
> >> just punted on version handling until someone actually turned up who
> >> needed it and was willing to do the work to add it in a useful
> >> cross-platform manner. For now at least, version specifiers have
> >> poor coverage in bindep's unit tests and no coverage in its
> >> functional tests and have probably bit-rotted on us.
> >>
> >> It's on me that I forgot we actually mention version constraints in
> >> the bindep documentation, with no indication that they aren't a
> >> first-class feature at the moment. Anyway, it sounds like you may
> >> have time and interest to help us get this supported properly (at
> >> least for rpm-based platforms), so I'm thrilled and looking forward
> >> to working with you toward that goal. Thanks again!
> >> -- 
> >> Jeremy Stanley
> >>
> >> __________________________________________________________________________
> >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> >> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
> > For reader’s sake, the patch to support versions for brief mode of the  
> > tool is: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/381979/
> 
> I hate to be PITA but the patch did not get any review attention for two  
> months+, even with frequent irc pings of relevant folks. I wanted to
> reuse  
> versioned dependencies for Neutron as a self-documenting contract with  
> platforms and distributions; but without this feature completed, I can’t  
> really move forward with it, and if nothing changes, we may probably end
> up  
> crafting some custom tracking file for basically the same matter.
> 
> I still hope we can get this in, and then reuse bindep.txt for minimal  
> runtime dependencies version tracking for interested projects. The patch
> is  
> small, it should not take much time for a seasoned reviewer...

How do you intend to have this work on CentOS 7 if it requires a newer
version of rpm than is available on CentOS 7? There are comments about
maybe warning the user at the very least.

Also, I think there is a bug in the output for more complex version
requirements. Comments left on change.

Clark



More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list