https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162#c15
--- Comment #15 from James Carter 2013-04-02 00:00:18 UTC ---
Growl, snarl, everyone can start pointing fingers at everyone else now. The
cause of this screwup is that .../suse/setup/descr/packages.gz on my enterprise
repo has incorrect Obs lines. Looking at =Pkg: texlive-extratools 2012.61
4.2.1 noarch on SuSE Build Service (base url, replacing ..., is
http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/openSUSE:/12.3/standard/ ) versus my
own package index, SBS says
+Obs:
texlive-tools < 2012
-Obs:
(correct) whereas mine says
+Obs:
texlive-tools
-Obs:
which is the bogosity noted in the libzypp test cases. So why is this
incorrect data in the file? The script that generates the file does the
following:
rpm -q --qf "obso=[%{OBSOLETES}\n]" -p
texlive-extratools-2012.61-4.2.1.noarch.rpm
Its output: obso=texlive-tools
(Of course it extracts the other needed fields and lists also, and these are
reformatted with proper item tags to make the package stanza.) Tested with
rpm-4.8.0-28.41.1.i586 , rpm-4.9.1.2-18.2.2.i586 , rpm-4.10.2-2.1.1.i586 , they
all give the same output on the same file.
What tipped me off was, last night I was downloading some codecs from SBS and
Packman, and my package management script included the request for
texlive-scheme-medium (I planned to just ignore when the thing failed to
install). So Zypper proposed to install 797 packages, mostly texlive stuff. I
let it run, and the installation was successful. I had keeppackages=1 (so I
could copy the codecs into the enterprise repo), and the downloaded texlive
packages were the ones we've seen problems with in the obsoletes issue. So the
solver recognizes that SBS says that the SBS packages are not incompatible with
other required packages, while my bit-for-bit identical packages are
incompatible, so the solver uses the ones from SBS and gets everything onto the
machine.
So I would say that the solver's comparison machinery is off the hook, and the
finger of blame points at rpm. So now what?
A. Am I abusing the format mechanism in rpm?
B. Is the relation info (texlive-tools < 2012) actually in the package file?
C. Is rpm messing up extracting the relation info, e.g. stopping at the first
blank?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.