Обсуждение: Issues with the latest minor updates and Alma/Rocky 9 and 10

We use Red Hat Enterprise Linux to build x86_64 RPMs for RHEL and its
clones.

Red Hat pushed OpenSSL 3.5 as a part of 10.1 and 9.7 release, and these
updates did not make into both Rocky and Alma yet.

Currently latest minor updates built on RHEL 10.1 and 9.7 cannot be
installed on Rocky/Alma 9 and 10 because of this.

We always had LLVM breakage during RHEL minor updates that was slightly
easier to deal with and affected very minority of users (and we have
sysupdates repo anyway and there is a plan to fix it permanently for
future), but this OpenSSL update issue is not easy to solve.

FWIW Rocky/Alma 8 are not affected.

So this is just a "I know the problem, however currently there is not
much I can do other than waiting for Rocky and Alma to catch up" email,
but I'm also open to suggestions.

Regards,
--
Devrim Gündüz
Open Source Solution Architect, PostgreSQL Major Contributor
BlueSky: @devrim.gunduz.org , @gunduz.org

On Fri, 14 Nov 2025, Devrim Gündüz wrote:

> Currently latest minor updates built on RHEL 10.1 and 9.7 cannot be
> installed on Rocky/Alma 9 and 10 because of this.

Does this also mean that they do not work for, say, RHEL 9.6
that is not updated to 9.7?

Marcin

Hi,

I think I fixed this problem. Rocky Linux / Alma Linux 9 and 10 users
please enable sysupdates repo first. You may need a recent repository
RPM/configuration (pushed a new repository RPM today as well) . That
repo now includes OpenSSL 3.5.1 along with LLVM/CLANG 20, crypto-
policies, etc and all of them have PGDG suffix in the package names. My
tests were successful on my test boxes.

Regards, Devri

On Fri, 2025-11-14 at 00:15 +0300, Devrim Gündüz wrote:
>
> We use Red Hat Enterprise Linux to build x86_64 RPMs for RHEL and its
> clones.
>
> Red Hat pushed OpenSSL 3.5 as a part of 10.1 and 9.7 release, and
> these
> updates did not make into both Rocky and Alma yet.
>
> Currently latest minor updates built on RHEL 10.1 and 9.7 cannot be
> installed on Rocky/Alma 9 and 10 because of this.
>
> We always had LLVM breakage during RHEL minor updates that was
> slightly
> easier to deal with and affected very minority of users (and we have
> sysupdates repo anyway and there is a plan to fix it permanently for
> future), but this OpenSSL update issue is not easy to solve.
>
> FWIW Rocky/Alma 8 are not affected.
>
> So this is just a "I know the problem, however currently there is not
> much I can do other than waiting for Rocky and Alma to catch up"
> email,
> but I'm also open to suggestions.
>
> Regards,

--
Devrim Gündüz
Open Source Solution Architect, PostgreSQL Major Contributor
BlueSky: @devrim.gunduz.org , @gunduz.org

Hi Devrim,

Am Samstag, dem 15.11.2025 um 18:02 +0300 schrieb Devrim Gündüz:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think I fixed this problem. Rocky Linux / Alma Linux 9 and 10 users
> please enable sysupdates repo first. You may need a recent repository
> RPM/configuration (pushed a new repository RPM today as well) . That
> repo now includes OpenSSL 3.5.1 along with LLVM/CLANG 20, crypto-
> policies, etc and all of them have PGDG suffix in the package names.
> My
> tests were successful on my test boxes.
>

FYI,

With sysupdates enabled, this doesn't work on one of my test VMs here.
Thats because it has mesa-vulkan drivers installed (gnome-session
depends on it) and they want llvm-19, but sysupdates now has llvm-20 in
its offering. The output:

 Problem 1: package mesa-dri-drivers-24.2.8-3.el9_6.x86_64 from @System
requires libLLVM.so.19.1()(64bit), but none of the providers can be
installed
  - package mesa-dri-drivers-24.2.8-3.el9_6.x86_64 from @System
requires libLLVM.so.19.1(LLVM_19.1)(64bit), but none of the providers
can be installed
  - cannot install both llvm-libs-20.1.8-44PGDG.el9.x86_64 from pgdg-
rhel9-sysupdates and llvm-libs-19.1.7-1.el9.x86_64 from @System
  - cannot install both llvm-libs-20.1.8-44PGDG.el9.x86_64 from pgdg-
rhel9-sysupdates and llvm-libs-19.1.7-3PGDG.el9.x86_64 from pgdg-rhel9-
sysupdates
  - cannot install both llvm-libs-19.1.7-1.el9.x86_64 from appstream
and llvm-libs-20.1.8-44PGDG.el9.x86_64 from pgdg-rhel9-sysupdates
  - cannot install the best update candidate for package mesa-dri-
drivers-24.2.8-3.el9_6.x86_64
  - cannot install the best update candidate for package llvm-libs-
19.1.7-1.el9.x86_64
 Problem 2: package mesa-vulkan-drivers-24.2.8-3.el9_6.x86_64 from
@System requires libLLVM.so.19.1()(64bit), but none of the providers
can be installed
  - package mesa-vulkan-drivers-24.2.8-3.el9_6.x86_64 from @System
requires libLLVM.so.19.1(LLVM_19.1)(64bit), but none of the providers
can be installed
  - cannot install both llvm-libs-20.1.8-44PGDG.el9.x86_64 from pgdg-
rhel9-sysupdates and llvm-libs-19.1.7-1.el9.x86_64 from @System
  - cannot install both llvm-libs-20.1.8-44PGDG.el9.x86_64 from pgdg-
rhel9-sysupdates and llvm-libs-19.1.7-3PGDG.el9.x86_64 from pgdg-rhel9-
sysupdates
  - cannot install both llvm-libs-19.1.7-1.el9.x86_64 from appstream
and llvm-libs-20.1.8-44PGDG.el9.x86_64 from pgdg-rhel9-sysupdates
  - package libomp-20.1.8-44PGDG.el9.x86_64 from pgdg-rhel9-sysupdates
requires llvm-libs(x86-64) = 20.1.8-44PGDG.el9, but none of the
providers can be installed
  - package libomp-20.1.8-44PGDG.el9.x86_64 from pgdg-rhel9-sysupdates
requires libLLVM.so.20.1()(64bit), but none of the providers can be
installed
  - package libomp-20.1.8-44PGDG.el9.x86_64 from pgdg-rhel9-sysupdates
requires libLLVM.so.20.1(LLVM_20.1)(64bit), but none of the providers
can be installed
  - cannot install the best update candidate for package mesa-vulkan-
drivers-24.2.8-3.el9_6.x86_64
  - cannot install the best update candidate for package libomp-19.1.7-
1.el9.x86_64

There are more problems logged, but it seems they're all related to
this conflict.


    Bernd

Hi,

On Mon, 2025-11-17 at 10:56 +0100, Bernd Helmle wrote:
> With sysupdates enabled, this doesn't work on one of my test VMs here.
> Thats because it has mesa-vulkan drivers installed (gnome-session
> depends on it) and they want llvm-19, but sysupdates now has llvm-20
> in its offering. The output:

<snip>

I know I cannot make everyone and every installation happy (for now, at
least), and I definitely intentionally ignored those dependencies by
aiming at server installations only. Sorry about that, this is the first
time it happened and lots of last-minute updates ended up with lack of
testing on Rocky and AlmaLinux :( Apologies.

That said, working on a permanent solution:

https://github.com/pgdg-packaging/pgdg-rpms/issues/119#issuecomment-3541939057

Regards,
--
Devrim Gündüz
Open Source Solution Architect, PostgreSQL Major Contributor
BlueSky: @devrim.gunduz.org , @gunduz.org