[Bug 1043348] New: [Build 20170607] 'strange' patterns selected in minimal autoyast setup
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1043348 Bug ID: 1043348 Summary: [Build 20170607] 'strange' patterns selected in minimal autoyast setup Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: Other URL: http://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/416882/modules/repos/ steps/3 OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: libzypp Assignee: zypp-maintainers@forge.provo.novell.com Reporter: dimstar@opensuse.org QA Contact: qa-bugs@suse.de Found By: --- Blocker: --- ## Observation openQA test in scenario opensuse-Tumbleweed-DVD-x86_64-autoyast_minimal@64bit fails in [repos](http://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/416882/modules/repos/steps/3) ## Details the pattern 'base' requires 'minimal_base' and 'minimal_base' recommends 'minimal_base-conflicts' After the system has been setup, pattern 'base' and 'minimal_base-conflicts' have been installed, minimal_base is missing (which sounds weird) also, when doing: zypper in -t pattern minimal_base, zypp claims "minimal_base not found in package names and capabilities" zypper in patterns-base-minimal_base on the other hand works (so the pattern 'package' is generated) I currently got a VM here which has been installed using the 'autoyast profile used by openQA too: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/os-autoinst/os-autoinst-distri-opensuse/ma... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1043348
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1043348#c1
--- Comment #1 from Dominique Leuenberger
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1043348
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1043348#c2
--- Comment #2 from Dominique Leuenberger
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1043348
Max Lin
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1043348
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1043348#c4
Michael Andres
(5675)pattern:minimal_base-conflicts-20170319-7.1.x86_64(openSUSE-20170607-0) PROVIDES (2){ autopattern() == patterns-base-minimal_base-conflicts pattern:minimal_base-conflicts == 20170319-7.1 } (6138)pattern:minimal_base-conflicts-20170319-7.1.x86_64(@System) PROVIDES (2){ autopattern() == patterns-base-minimal_base-conflicts pattern:minimal_base-conflicts == 20170319-7.1 }
Looks like the libsolv parser is smart enough, when creating the pattern ;) Nevertheless 'they' (I don't know who does the patterns- packages) messed up the patterns:
4450 patterns-base-minimal_base-20170319-7.1.x86_64 (99)openSUSE-20170607-0 openSUSE nam: patterns-base-minimal_base pro: pattern() = basesystem pro: pattern() = minimal_base
The least 'pattern() = name' is used to create the pattern object:
(5674)pattern:basesystem-20170319-7.1.x86_64(openSUSE-20170607-0) PROVIDES (2){ autopattern() == patterns-base-minimal_base pattern:basesystem == 20170319-7.1 }
There is no 'pattern:minimal_base' (or '-t pattern minimal_base') because the parser chooses '=basesystem'. Due to this 'pattern:basesystem' is associated with package:patterns-base-minimal_base. (same in package:patterns-base-base 'pattern() = basesystem' and 'pattern() = base') You should not use multiple 'pattern() = name' definitions in a patterns- package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1043348
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1043348#c5
Dominique Leuenberger
participants (1)
-
bugzilla_noreply@novell.com