Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.

Bug 1467164

Summary:	26 Final RC-1.3 compose is missing 'custodia' package
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Adam Williamson <awilliam>
Component:	distribution	Assignee:	mboddu
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	urgent	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	26	CC:	cheimes, dennis, kevin, mattdm, menantea, robatino
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:	AcceptedBlocker
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2017-07-05 01:17:17 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	1349188, 1430830

Description Adam Williamson 2017-07-03 06:00:36 UTC

For some reason, the 'custodia' package is entirely missing from the Fedora 26 Final RC-1.3 compose:

https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/26/Fedora-26-20170702.0/compose/Everything/x86_64/os/Packages/c/

Check the package list there for a 'custodia' package, you will find none. Now compare to the nightly of the same date:

https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/branched/Fedora-26-20170702.n.0/compose/Everything/x86_64/os/Packages/c/

and you will see there *is* a custodia package present, custodia-0.3.1-2.fc26.noarch.rpm , which was a part of this update:

https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-0d0ec3e0af

which was pushed stable a month ago. I do not know why the package is missing from the RC-1.3 compose, but it is a clear criteria violation unfortunately, as it renders FreeIPA (at least server, I believe also client) entirely impossible to install, as freeipa-server-common requires custodia:

2017-07-02T15:25:48Z WARNING 
 Problem 1: package freeipa-server-4.4.4-2.fc26.x86_64 requires freeipa-server-common = 4.4.4-2.fc26, but none of the providers can be installed
  - conflicting requests
  - nothing provides custodia >= 0.3.1 needed by freeipa-server-common-4.4.4-2.fc26.noarch
 Problem 2: package freeipa-server-dns-4.4.4-2.fc26.noarch requires freeipa-server = 4.4.4-2.fc26, but none of the providers can be installed
  - package freeipa-server-4.4.4-2.fc26.x86_64 requires freeipa-server-common = 4.4.4-2.fc26, but none of the providers can be installed
  - conflicting requests
  - nothing provides custodia >= 0.3.1 needed by freeipa-server-common-4.4.4-2.fc26.noarch
 Problem 3: package freeipa-server-trust-ad-4.4.4-2.fc26.x86_64 requires freeipa-server = 4.4.4-2.fc26, but none of the providers can be installed
  - package freeipa-server-4.4.4-2.fc26.x86_64 requires freeipa-server-common = 4.4.4-2.fc26, but none of the providers can be installed
  - conflicting requests
  - nothing provides custodia >= 0.3.1 needed by freeipa-server-common-4.4.4-2.fc26.noarch

We urgently need to do an RC-1.4 compose with this fixed.

Comment 1 Kamil Páral 2017-07-03 09:49:32 UTC

*** Bug 1467267 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 2 Matthew Miller 2017-07-03 14:11:54 UTC

Clearly a blocker. I'm also concerned that other packages may be dropped and we just happened to notice this one because it blocks something needed for a specific Server role.

Comment 3 Kevin Fenzi 2017-07-03 14:45:23 UTC

+1 blocker

Comment 4 Adam Williamson 2017-07-03 15:49:57 UTC

Matthew: yes, I agree on that - I'd like, if possible, for releng to explain why custodia was missing and check whether anything else was affected similarly.

Comment 5 Matthew Miller 2017-07-03 15:59:44 UTC

(In reply to Adam Williamson from comment #4)
> Matthew: yes, I agree on that - I'd like, if possible, for releng to explain
> why custodia was missing and check whether anything else was affected
> similarly.

Got this in IRC:

[04:10:08] <tyll_> adamw: mboddu: Sorry about custodia, I wrongly blocked it when cleaning up broken deps :-/ I skipped python-etcd for freeipa but missed that custodia was still on the list as an intermediate dependency

Related ticket is https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6836, and I *think* we're all okay.

Comment 6 Adam Williamson 2017-07-03 18:34:18 UTC

Discussed at 2017-07-03 blocker review meeting: https://meetbot-raw.fedoraproject.org/fedora-blocker-review/2017-07-03/f26-blocker-review.2017-07-03-16.06.html . Accepted as a blocker bug as a clear violation of Alpha criterion "Release-blocking roles and the supported role configuration interfaces must meet the core functional Role Definition Requirements to the extent that supported roles can be successfully deployed, started, stopped, brought to a working configuration, and queried."

For the record, we are unblocking all packages which were blocked from RC-1.1 and RC-1.3 due to dependency issues, on the basis this happened far too late and could have unpredictable effects we do not have time to exhaustively investigate: see https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6836 for more on that. Marking as MODIFIED as I believe mboddu already unblocked custodia in preparation for the next compose.

Comment 7 Adam Williamson 2017-07-05 01:17:17 UTC

Fix confirmed in RC-1.4, the openQA test passed, so the package is certainly back.