https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162#c1 Dr. Werner Fink changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO CC| |ma@suse.com, ro@suse.com InfoProvider| |ma@suse.com --- Comment #1 from Dr. Werner Fink 2013-03-27 08:51:02 UTC --- There is a problem with removing this obsoletes: an existion TeXLive 2011 of e.g. openSUSE 12.2 would crash then. As I'm not allowed to move subversions like .60.svn26263 into the Release and zypper seems not be able to determine e.g. texlive-tools < %{texlive_version} without the subversions I don't know how to solve this. Removing will lead to problems if old packages will not be removed, not removing it causing such bugs. @Michael and Rudi? How can this be solved? -- 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.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162#c3 --- Comment #3 from Dr. Werner Fink 2013-03-27 10:38:57 UTC --- I thought about ... maybe the obsolete lines should become e.g. texlive-tools <= 2011 as this was the last TeXLive version from openmSUSE 12.2 and below. -- 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.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162#c5 --- Comment #5 from Dr. Werner Fink 2013-03-27 11:38:10 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) Indeed it would be a problem is there would be a TeXLive '2011.<something>' but there is no such beast ;) But OK this is could be a general problem of the solver as well. -- 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.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162#c7 --- Comment #7 from James Carter 2013-03-28 05:17:52 UTC --- Created an attachment (id=532307) --> (http://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=532307) Zypper test case for texlive-extratools texlive-tools -- 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.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162#c9 --- Comment #9 from Michael Andres 2013-03-28 12:48:47 CET --- Thanks for the testcase. One problem is texlive-collection-context: DUMP texlive-collection-context { ============================== (841)texlive-collection-context-2012.61.svn23785-4.2.1.noarch(Couch-Build-12.3) PROVIDES (1){ texlive-collection-context == 2012.61.svn23785-4.2.1 } REQUIRES (32){ ... texlive-context >= 2012 ... } OBSOLETES (1){ texlive-context } } You can't require texlive-context and at the same time obsolete all texlive-context versions. This makes the package uninstallable. It had to be 'texlive-context < 2012', but actually a REQUIRES/OBSOLETES does not make much sense to me at all. If there still is a texlive-context package, it will take care about obsoleting it's old versions when it gets installed. So the OBSOLETES is IMO needless. Likewise in PROVIDES/OBSOLETES, indicating a package renames: avoid unconditional obsoletes! texlive-collection-documentation-base-2012.61.svn17091-4.2.1.noarch: PROVIDES texlive-doc == 2012 OBSOLETES texlive-doc It should be 'OBSOLETES texlive-doc < 2012' === A quick query on the testcase listing texlive packages with unconditional obsoletes. They should be reviewed. There are also some more uninstallable packages (obsolets/requires): texlive-collection-binextra-2012.61.svn25648-4.2.1.noarch obs: texlive-bin obs: texlive-dvilj texlive-collection-context-2012.61.svn23785-4.2.1.noarch obs: texlive-context texlive-collection-documentation-base-2012.61.svn17091-4.2.1.noarch obs: texlive-doc texlive-collection-latex-2012.61.svn25030-4.2.1.noarch obs: texlive-latex *** req: texlive-latex >= 2012 *** UNINSTALLABLE obs: texlive-latex-doc texlive-collection-metapost-2012.61.svn23252-4.2.1.noarch obs: texlive-metapost texlive-collection-xetex-2012.61.svn25850-4.2.1.noarch obs: texlive-xetex *** req: texlive-xetex >= 2012 *** UNINSTALLABLE texlive-dviljk-bin-2012.20120611.svn22981-3.3.1.i586 obs: texlive-bin-dvilj texlive-extratools-2012.57-3.4.noarch obs: texlive-tools texlive-latex-bin-bin-2012.20120611.svn14050-3.3.1.i586 obs: texlive-bin-latex texlive-metapost-bin-2012.20120611.svn22981-3.3.1.i586 obs: texlive-bin-metapost texlive-xetex-bin-2012.20120611.svn22981-3.3.1.i586 obs: texlive-bin-xetex texlive-filesystem-2012.61-4.2.1.noarc obs: tetex -- 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.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162#c11 Dr. Werner Fink changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- InfoProvider|ma@suse.com |jimc@math.ucla.edu --- Comment #11 from Dr. Werner Fink 2013-03-28 12:35:59 UTC --- @James: Please explain where the unconditional obsoletes come from? The only unconditional obsolete is for tetex only, any other obsolete line was in the original spec files given with < %{texlive_version}. -- 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.

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.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162#c17 Dr. Werner Fink changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #17 from Dr. Werner Fink 2013-05-03 07:48:20 UTC --- This one is fixed, from changelog: Wed Mar 27 2013 werner@suse.de - Change Obsoletes from < 2012+subversion to <= 2011 (bnc#811162) - Let mathdesign require tex(texnansi.enc) (bnc#808731) - Let biber-bin require perl(Text::BibTeX) (bnc#811258) - Do not require xfs as we do not use xfs at all, otherwise we have to add some more lua code in the %post scriptlet. -- 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.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162#c19 --- Comment #19 from Bernhard Wiedemann 2013-07-19 12:00:24 CEST --- This is an autogenerated message for OBS integration: This bug (811162) was mentioned in https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/183711 Maintenance / https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/183712 Maintenance / -- 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.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811162#c21 --- Comment #21 from Bernhard Wiedemann 2013-07-22 15:00:31 CEST --- This is an autogenerated message for OBS integration: This bug (811162) was mentioned in https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/183983 Maintenance / texlive-specs-a.openSUSE_12.3_Update -- 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.