[Bug 1095148] New: virtualbox KMPs can't be used with the latest kernel release
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148 Bug ID: 1095148 Summary: virtualbox KMPs can't be used with the latest kernel release Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Distribution Version: Leap 15.0 Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Critical Priority: P5 - None Component: Virtualization:Other Assignee: Larry.Finger@gmail.com Reporter: fvogt@suse.com QA Contact: qa-bugs@suse.de CC: kernel-maintainers@forge.provo.novell.com Found By: --- Blocker: --- The latest virtualbox-{guest,host}-kmp-default packages require a kernel older than the latest released versions. It's therefore impossible to use those drivers with the latest kernel update. kernel-maintainers are in CC to provide information on how this is supposed to work for maintenance updates. See also boo#1066488. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c1
Takashi Iwai
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c2
--- Comment #2 from Michal Suchanek
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c3
--- Comment #3 from Takashi Iwai
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c4
--- Comment #4 from Fabian Vogt
Can you test with https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:michals/rpm
I don't think that will work - /etc/os-release in the build env is provided by dummy-release and only contains fake information. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c5
--- Comment #5 from Larry Finger
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c6
--- Comment #6 from Takashi Iwai
Could someone please tell me what bug 1077692 says? I am not authorized to read it!
Oh, you'll be the first person to use the new interface? ;) https://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2018-05/msg00418.html The bug was about kernel-default rpm missing "provides" entries with recent kernels. The find-*.ksyms scripts were updated: https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/579024 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c7
--- Comment #7 from Michal Suchanek
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c8
--- Comment #8 from Michal Suchanek
Could someone please tell me what bug 1077692 says? I am not authorized to read it!
It's irrelevant. Provides script was changed as result of this bug and requires are bogus in the virtualbox kmp. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c9
--- Comment #9 from Fabian Vogt
So is there a reasonable way to detect tumbleweed?
0%{?suse_version} && !0%{?sle_version} -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c10
--- Comment #10 from Michal Suchanek
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c11
--- Comment #11 from Takashi Iwai
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c12
--- Comment #12 from Michal Suchanek
The --opensuse option is passed in /usr/lib/rpm/filesattrs.*.attr. I suppose you can evaluate there?
%__kmp_provides %{_rpmconfigdir}/find-provides.ksyms --opensuse 0%{?is_opensuse} %__kmp_requires %{_rpmconfigdir}/find-requires.ksyms --opensuse 0%{?is_opensuse} So if somebody can write a release-neutral rpm macro that detects tumbleweed I suppose it can be passed in. AFAIK the recommended rpm macro to detect tumbleweed depends on the current latest opensuse release number so it is not release-neutral. Failing that we should eschew dummy-release for kmp builds. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c13
--- Comment #13 from Takashi Iwai
(In reply to Takashi Iwai from comment #11)
The --opensuse option is passed in /usr/lib/rpm/filesattrs.*.attr. I suppose you can evaluate there?
%__kmp_provides %{_rpmconfigdir}/find-provides.ksyms --opensuse 0%{?is_opensuse} %__kmp_requires %{_rpmconfigdir}/find-requires.ksyms --opensuse 0%{?is_opensuse}
So if somebody can write a release-neutral rpm macro that detects tumbleweed I suppose it can be passed in.
AFAIK the recommended rpm macro to detect tumbleweed depends on the current latest opensuse release number so it is not release-neutral.
Failing that we should eschew dummy-release for kmp builds.
How about to change --opensuse with --preserve-kabi and pass 0%{sle_version} instead? If the argument is non-zero, it's either SLE or Leap. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c14
--- Comment #14 from Michal Suchanek
How about to change --opensuse with --preserve-kabi and pass 0%{sle_version} instead? If the argument is non-zero, it's either SLE or Leap.
Thanks for the suggestion. Renamed to --suse-release to make the argument name saner. Trying to understand what --preserve-kabi means here would be rather confusing because the kabi is not preserved here. It is assumed it is preserved in the kernel package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c15
--- Comment #15 from Larry Finger
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c16
--- Comment #16 from Takashi Iwai
I have been reading the comments, but I do not understand the implications of the changes. I do have some questions.
1. Does this issue require any changes in the VirtualBox packages?
No, we would just need to rebuild KMPs with the fixed rpm.
2. What is the path that updates to VB in SLE take?
SLE has no VB package :) It's present only on openSUSE, so far. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c17
Michal Suchanek
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c18
--- Comment #18 from Fabian Vogt
Please review the rpm update
It passes %{sle_release} as --suse-release, that's IMO highly misleading. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c19
--- Comment #19 from Michal Suchanek
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c20
--- Comment #20 from Fabian Vogt
Feel free to come up with different naming.
sle_release is also misleading because it obviously applies to openSUSE.
--sle-release would be perfectly fine - that --sle-release 0 means openSUSE is IMO obvious. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c21
--- Comment #21 from Michal Suchanek
(In reply to Michal Suchanek from comment #19)
Feel free to come up with different naming.
sle_release is also misleading because it obviously applies to openSUSE.
--sle-release would be perfectly fine - that --sle-release 0 means openSUSE is IMO obvious.
That's exactly how it is misleading. It is 0 only on Tumbleweed and that's the reason we switch from is_opensuse to sle_release. It it was non-zero on SLE only then it would be inverse of is_opensuse and completely meaningless. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c22
--- Comment #22 from Fabian Vogt
(In reply to Fabian Vogt from comment #20)
(In reply to Michal Suchanek from comment #19)
Feel free to come up with different naming.
sle_release is also misleading because it obviously applies to openSUSE.
--sle-release would be perfectly fine - that --sle-release 0 means openSUSE is IMO obvious.
That's exactly how it is misleading. It is 0 only on Tumbleweed and that's the reason we switch from is_opensuse to sle_release. It it was non-zero on SLE only then it would be inverse of is_opensuse and completely meaningless.
Then maybe --is-tumbleweed with the inversion passed as value? Anyway, this is turning into bikeshedding... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c23
--- Comment #23 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c24
--- Comment #24 from Fabian Vogt
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c25
Michael Schröder
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c26
--- Comment #26 from Michael Schröder
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c27
--- Comment #27 from Michael Schröder
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c28
--- Comment #28 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c29
Michal Suchanek
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c30
--- Comment #30 from Michal Suchanek
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c32
--- Comment #32 from Michael Schröder
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c33
--- Comment #33 from Michal Suchanek
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c34
--- Comment #34 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c35
--- Comment #35 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c36
Michal Suchanek
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c37
Fabian Vogt
So next KMP build should fix it.
Please re-test.
Looks like it worked - I rebuilt virtualbox against :Update and instead of the uname-r requires it has ksym(default:foo) ones now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c45
--- Comment #45 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
Michal Suchanek
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c48
--- Comment #48 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c49
--- Comment #49 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148#c50
--- Comment #50 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095148
Swamp Workflow Management
participants (1)
-
bugzilla_noreply@novell.com