Openwsman-2.6.8-22.el9.src.rpm install on alma9

Support
1

Hello,
Im trying to install on alma9.2 a software that requires libwsman1 aka
openwsman-2.6.8-22.el9.src.rpm as dependency.

my repos are (sorry as a new user i cannot post more than 2 links in this 1st post)
https://www.nic.funet.fi/pub/mirrors/almalinux.org/9.2/AppStream/x86_64/os/
edit/almalinux.org/9.2/BaseOS/x86_64/os/
edit/almalinux.org/9.2/CRB/x86_64/os/

i cannot find package libwsman1 in any of them mentioned above however BUT i can find the package in https://repo.almalinux.org/vault/9/AppStream/Source/Packages/openwsman-2.6.8-23.el9.src.rpm

Now im a bit confused since in the same software install runs fine over in RHEL9 since the package comes from rhel-9-for-x86_64-appstream-rpms,

So the question is should i add these repos also
## Sources
[baseos-source]
name=AlmaLinux $releasever - BaseOS Source
mirrorlist=**edit**://mirrors.almalinux.org/mirrorlist/$releasever/baseos-source
# baseurl=**edit**://repo.almalinux.org/vault/$releasever/BaseOS/Source/
enabled=0
gpgcheck=1
gpgkey=file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-AlmaLinux
``
[appstream-source]
name=AlmaLinux $releasever - AppStream Source
mirrorlist=**edit**://mirrors.almalinux.org/mirrorlist/$releasever/appstream-source
# baseurl=**edit**://repo.almalinux.org/vault/$releasever/AppStream/Source/
enabled=0
gpgcheck=1
gpgkey=file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-AlmaLinux

2

Lets start with dump search:

$ dnf search libwsman
============================================= Name Matched: libwsman ==========
libwsman-devel.i686 : Open source Implementation of WS-Management
libwsman-devel.x86_64 : Open source Implementation of WS-Management
libwsman1.i686 : Open source Implementation of WS-Management
libwsman1.x86_64 : Open source Implementation of WS-Management

There is package “libwsman1”? What does it provide?

$ dnf rq --provides libwsman1.x86_64
libwsman.so.1()(64bit)
libwsman1 = 2.6.8-23.el9
libwsman1(x86-64) = 2.6.8-23.el9
libwsman_client.so.4()(64bit)
libwsman_curl_client_transport.so.1()(64bit)
openwsman = 2.6.8-23.el9

Where is it?

$ dnf list libwsman1.x86_64
Available Packages
libwsman1.x86_64                2.6.8-23.el9                appstream

If that is the libwsman1 that you are looking for, then dnf should already see it, because it is in appstream.

If not, then what does that software actually requires?

Said other way: the .src.rpm does not help you directly, because it is used to build the binary RPM packages, and those seem to exists in repos already.

3

Yes, your right.

It seems that the newer version seems to be the issue in Alma

sudo yum whatprovides libwsman1
Updating Subscription Management repositories.
Last metadata expiration check: 0:02:41 ago on Tue 31 Oct 2023 02:18:08 PM EET.
libwsman1-2.6.8-23.el9.i686 : Open source Implementation of WS-Management
Repo : AlmaLinux_9_-_AppStream
Matched from:
Provide : libwsman1 = 2.6.8-23.el9

sudo yum whatprovides libwsman1
Updating Subscription Management repositories.
Last metadata expiration check: 1:52:58 ago on Tue 31 Oct 2023 12:22:51 PM EET.
libwsman1-2.6.8-22.el9.i686 : Open source Implementation of WS-Management
Repo : rhel-9-for-x86_64-appstream-rpms
Matched from:
Provide : libwsman1 = 2.6.8-22.el9

4

I.e. the software package has been built in system that has 2.6.8-22.el9 and explicitly requires libwsman1 = 2.6.8-22.el9.

[alma]$ dnf rq --changelog libwsman1.x86_64
Changelog for libwsman1-2.6.8-23.el9.x86_64
* Thu Nov 24 2022 Vitezslav Crhonek <vcrhonek@redhat.com> - 2.6.8-23
- Improve handling of HTTP 401 Unauthorized
  Resolves: #2127415

* Mon Aug 09 2021 Mohan Boddu <mboddu@redhat.com> - 2.6.8-22
- Rebuilt for IMA sigs, glibc 2.34, aarch64 flags
  Related: rhbz#1991688

* Wed Jun 16 2021 Mohan Boddu <mboddu@redhat.com> - 2.6.8-21
- Rebuilt for RHEL 9 BETA for openssl 3.0
  Related: rhbz#1971065

...

How come your RHEL 9 still offers 2.6.8-22 even though Red Hat must(?) have released the 2.6.8-23 somewhere?

5

“How come your RHEL 9 still offers 2.6.8-22 even though Red Hat must(?) have released the 2.6.8-23 somewhere?”
It actually offers now newer version too and when tried to update it, (on a machine that previous successfull install) it fails. I emailed vendor about it, thanks for help and case closed.