Zfs: 0.8.0 Does not install on RHEL 8 (depmod change)

Created on 7 May 2019  路  8Comments  路  Source: openzfs/zfs

System information


Type | Version/Name
--- | ---
Distribution Name | Red Hat Enterprise Linux
Distribution Version | 8.0.0
Linux Kernel | 4.18.0-80.el8
Architecture | x86_64
ZFS Version | 0.8.0-rc4
SPL Version | 0.8.0-rc4

Describe the problem you're observing

depmod in RHEL8 has moved from /sbin/depmod to /usr/sbin/depmod

Fixed by changing /sbin/depmod to /usr/sbin/depmod in zfs/scripts/kmodtool

Describe how to reproduce the problem

Follow Custom Package instructions, fails at rpm install nothing provides /sbin/depmod needed by zfs

Include any warning/errors/backtraces from the system logs

Error:
 Problem 1: conflicting requests
  - nothing provides /sbin/depmod needed by kmod-zfs-4.18.0-80.el8.x86_64-0.8.0-rc4.el8.x86_64
 Problem 2: package zfs-0.8.0-rc4.el8.x86_64 requires zfs-kmod = 0.8.0, but none of the providers can be installed
  - conflicting requests
  - nothing provides /sbin/depmod needed by kmod-zfs-4.18.0-80.el8.x86_64-0.8.0-rc4.el8.x86_64
 Problem 3: package zfs-dracut-0.8.0-rc4.el8.x86_64 requires zfs(x86-64) = 0.8.0-rc4.el8, but none of the providers can be installed
  - package zfs-0.8.0-rc4.el8.x86_64 requires zfs-kmod = 0.8.0, but none of the providers can be installed
  - conflicting requests
  - nothing provides /sbin/depmod needed by kmod-zfs-4.18.0-80.el8.x86_64-0.8.0-rc4.el8.x86_64
 Problem 4: package zfs-test-0.8.0-rc4.el8.x86_64 requires zfs(x86-64) = 0.8.0-rc4.el8, but none of the providers can be installed
  - package zfs-0.8.0-rc4.el8.x86_64 requires zfs-kmod = 0.8.0, but none of the providers can be installed
  - conflicting requests
  - nothing provides /sbin/depmod needed by kmod-zfs-4.18.0-80.el8.x86_64-0.8.0-rc4.el8.x86_64
Building

Most helpful comment

In addition to that in 0.7.13 there is a problem with missing /usr/bin/python which is nonexistent in RHEL 8 so rpmbuild complains about Python scripts during build of spl packages and fails.
I didn't want to spam with a new issue about that.

All 8 comments

@behlendorf With 0.8.0, we should stop shipping our own kmodtool fork, and use the one provided by either redhat-rpm-config (RHEL) or kmodtool (Fedora/EPEL).

That should resolve the issues, I think.

In addition to that in 0.7.13 there is a problem with missing /usr/bin/python which is nonexistent in RHEL 8 so rpmbuild complains about Python scripts during build of spl packages and fails.
I didn't want to spam with a new issue about that.

@Conan-Kudo right, shipping our own versions shouldn't be necessary any more. It'd be great to get a PR open for this.

@behlendorf in retrospect, we probably need it for deb/ubu builds, but we can resync with the fedora version.

I don't know if I can get to this, but I think we should do this before cutting 0.8.0.

@Conan-Kudo re-syncing with Fedora version makes good sense. This shouldn't be too tricky but it's also not going to be a trival drop in replacement. Our version still contains at least one needed feature which hasn't been accepted upstream (kmod-devel packages). There may be a few other little tweaks we need too.

While I think we should get this updated soon I don't think it needs to block 0.8.0. But it would be nice to see it in 0.8.1.

@behlendorf We shouldn't need the devel packages for 0.8.0 anymore, since SPL and ZFS are in one set of module packages.

That's true, but the kmod devel package is still required to build Lustre against ZFS.

Note that this occurs only when when using the "kmod" type build which results in zfs packages which require a specific kernel.
https://github.com/zfsonlinux/zfs/wiki/Custom-Packages#kmod

If the "kABI-tracking kmod" type build is used, the issue does not occur as the redhat-provided kmodtool is used, which gets the path to depmod right.
https://github.com/zfsonlinux/zfs/wiki/Custom-Packages#kabi-tracking-kmod

Was this page helpful?
0 / 5 - 0 ratings

Related issues

runderwo picture runderwo  路  54Comments

tycho picture tycho  路  67Comments

nivedita76 picture nivedita76  路  78Comments

Tualua picture Tualua  路  54Comments

Lalufu picture Lalufu  路  70Comments