On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 10:10:49AM +0100, Manfred Hollstein wrote:
Hi there,
I stumbled across this because I'm used to use apt-get for installing and updating packages. With a default configuration (just the RPMs from the DVD9 media linked into one RPMS.oss directory and the OS-11.1 updates repository as another installation source), it offers me to "update" the wireshark package.
What's strange with this is, that this security update has version
1.0.4-2.1
while the original one from the installation DVD has version
1.0.4-2.5
So, I could work-around this by creating an entry in /etc/apt/preferences (similar to zypper's priority and locks mechanisms), but to me this sounds wrong. Shouldn't have an update package _always_ have a version number than its preceeding package, i.e. the one that the update should replace?!?! FWIW, I extracted both RPMs and compared the resulting directories, and there are indeed differences:
Of course... It is a bug in the patch building engine which got changed for 11.1 We fixed the other affected updates already, I just approved the fixed wireshark.
but shouldn't the build service ensure, that an updated package will get a monotonously increasing version number? And, shouldn't this "wireshark security update" be re-built with a proper version number?
Yes, it was.
BTW, why have glibc and glibc-devel differing version numbers on i586 and i686? These are the packages on the DVD:
i586/glibc-2.9-2.8.i586.rpm i586/glibc-devel-2.9-2.8.i586.rpm i686/glibc-2.9-2.3.i686.rpm i686/glibc-devel-2.9-2.3.i686.rpm
This would lead to an "update" for glibc using apt-get as well... Architectural "compatible" packages should have identical version numbers, shouldn't they?
Different problem... No idea. Ciao, Marcus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-security+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-security+help@opensuse.org