FEDORA-2017-d0990b2cc4 created by adamwill 7 years ago for Fedora 25

This update reverts the attempt to fix bug #1394862 / bug #1397087 from libdb-5.3.28-21. Multiple reports indicate the attempted fix can still cause RPM database corruption in some cases, so we are backing out the fix to try and prevent any more people hitting that problem.

If you have already encountered RPM database issues after updating to -21, please run:

rm -f /var/lib/rpm/__db*
rpm --rebuilddb

as root. We apologize for the inconvenience.

This update has been submitted for testing by adamwill.

7 years ago

I have tested the new version: in general it seems to work (after the RPM database was repaired using the steps above).

I have not tested whether an update from the former version 5.3.28-16 to 5.3.28-21 would have caused RPM database corruption in the first place.

This update has been pushed to testing.

7 years ago
User Icon alexpl commented & provided feedback 7 years ago

I updated from -21 to -22 and I had already removed and recreated the database after the update to -21. As soon as the update got installed, the dnf tracer plugin crashed:

Tracer: Program 'tracer' crashed with following error:

b'error: db5 error(5) from dbenv->open: Input/output error\nerror: cannot open Packages index using db5 - Input/output error (5)\nerror: cannot open Packages database in /var/lib/rpm\nTraceback (most recent call last):\n File "/usr/bin/tracer", line 34, in <module>\n tracer.main.run()\n File "/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/tracer/main.py", line 45, in run\n return router.dispatch()\n File "/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/tracer/resources/router.py", line 52, in dispatch\n controller = DefaultController(self.args, self.packages)\n File "/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/tracer/controllers/default.py", line 62, in init\n self.applications = self.tracer.trace_affected(self._user(args.user))\n File "/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/tracer/resources/tracer.py", line 96, in trace_affected\n for file in self._PACKAGE_MANAGER.package_files(package.name):\n File "/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/tracer/resources/PackageManager.py", line 55, in package_files\n return self.package_managers[0].package_files(pkg_name)\n File "/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/tracer/packageManagers/dnf.py", line 34, in package_files\n if self._is_installed(pkg_name):\n File "/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/tracer/packageManagers/rpm.py", line 151, in _is_installed\n mi = ts.dbMatch(\'name\', pkg_name)\n_rpm.error: rpmdb open failed\n' Please visit https://github.com/FrostyX/tracer/issues and submit the issue. Thank you

Then I tried to check for updates and got another (similar) error:

dnf --enablerepo=*testing --refresh check-update

error: db5 error(5) from dbenv->open: Input/output error error: cannot open Packages index using db5 - Input/output error (5) error: cannot open Packages database in /var/lib/rpm Error: Error: rpmdb open failed

I removed and recreated the database once more and everything seems to be working now, but I think this will still be a problem for system upgrades, so I'm giving it negative karma.

User Icon kparal commented & provided feedback 7 years ago

updated from -21, rpm transactions seem to be working in both gnome-software and dnf

@alexpl this version is not expected to work for upgrades to F26, but I consider not breaking the RPM databases of F25 / F24 users to be more important than fixing upgrades to F26 at this point in time.

Are you interested in the pre-21 -> 22 update stability?

I'm not going to give it karma, but this "upgrade" broke my slapd server:

Jun 13 10:48:59 <host> slapd[2846]: bdb(<some>): BDB1537 /var/lib/ldap/__db.001: unable to read system-memory information: Input/output error Jun 13 10:48:59 <host> slapd[2846]: bdb_db_open: database "<some>" cannot be opened, err 5. Restore from backup!

User Icon cserpentis commented & provided feedback 7 years ago

works for me in a VM

So, reports indicate that updating from -21 to -22 will almost inevitably cause (recoverable) db corruption. Based on that, we're going to go with unpushing the -22 updates and writing a common bugs entry and maybe a blog post to tell people to rebuild the database for any problems. Sorry about all this to-ing and fro-ing, everyone. If you're on -22, I'd suggest downgrading to -21, but there shouldn't be any awful consequences to staying on -21. For clarity, here's what's actually in every version of the package:

  • -17 and lower: no fix for upgrade issue
  • -18 and -19: original version of the upgrade fix which caused lots of people to see RPM db corruption
  • -20 (Rawhide only): fix reverted, same as -17
  • -21: improved version of the upgrade fix which caused some people to see RPM db corruption
  • -22: fix reverted again, same as -17

We will send out a -23 with the fixes re-applied and another fix for a somewhat related issue included shortly. Updating to that may possibly cause corruption again, we are sorry about this. Recovery will work just the same.

@bojan - recover with rpm --rebuilddb, according to the devs this is perfectly safe and won't have any lasting effects. Sorry for the trouble.

This update has been unpushed.

@adamwill: I used db_recover on the slapd database and no worries. It's the price of progress. :-)

User Icon filiperosset commented & provided feedback 7 years ago

-1 broken here updating from libdb-5.3.28-21.fc25.x86_64 to libdb-5.3.28-22.fc25.x86_64

Please login to add feedback.

Content Type
Test Gating
Unstable by Karma
Stable by Karma
Stable by Time
7 years ago
in testing
7 years ago

Automated Test Results