[Bug 806310] New: libz1-32bit doesn't obsolete latest zlib-32bit
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806310 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806310#c0 Summary: libz1-32bit doesn't obsolete latest zlib-32bit Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE 12.3 Version: RC 1 Platform: Other OS/Version: openSUSE 12.2 Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Basesystem AssignedTo: mvyskocil@suse.com ReportedBy: suse-beta@cboltz.de QAContact: qa-bugs@suse.de Found By: Beta-Customer Blocker: --- (using Factory, last updated some days ago) It looks like libz1-32bit doesn't obsolete the latest version of zlib-32bit that was available in Factory (and probably also in openSUSE 12.2). # rpm -q libz1-32bit zlib-32bit libz1-32bit-1.2.7-8.1.x86_64 zlib-32bit-1.2.7-3.5.x86_64 # rpm -q --conflicts libz1-32bit # rpm -q --obsoletes libz1-32bit zlib-32bit < 1.2.7 # rpm -qi zlib-32bit Name : zlib-32bit Version : 1.2.7 Release : 3.5 Architecture: x86_64 Install Date: Mi 03 Okt 2012 16:57:21 CEST This causes two problems: a) zypper doesn't propose to install libz1-32bit automatically - I have to explicitely "zypper in libz1-32bit" b) when doing this, zypper doesn't propose to delete zlib-32bit This means I end up with libz1-32bit _and_ zlib-32bit installed. The main problem with this is that both own the same files: # rpm -ql libz1-32bit /lib/libz.so.1 /lib/libz.so.1.2.7 # rpm -ql zlib-32bit /lib/libz.so.1 /lib/libz.so.1.2.7 Looks like renaming a package without doing a version upgrade isn't the best idea - at least it makes adding a correct Obsoletes interesting[tm]. Interestingly, this seems to affect only the -32bit package. The 64bit zlib package was correctly replaced by libz1 - but I have no idea how and why ;-) (FYI: I usually use "zypper dup", only if dup comes up with too many conflicts, I use "zypper up".) Note: according to software.o.o, openSUSE 12.2 also came with zlib 1.2.7. This means this bug might also affect people who upgrade from 12.2 to 12.3. Michal: you renamed the package, therefore I'll assign this bugreport to you ;-) -- 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=806310 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806310#c1 Michal Vyskocil <mvyskocil@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|P5 - None |P3 - Medium Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #1 from Michal Vyskocil <mvyskocil@suse.com> 2013-03-05 10:24:00 UTC --- Hi, this is because native packages provides zlib = %{version}-%{release} and obsoletes < %{version}-%{release}, so the newest package is automatically replaced. On the other had this is not possible via baselibs.conf where release it not available. I've fix that removing version from obsoletes, which seems to work well rpm -q zlib-32bit zlib-32bit-1.2.7-2.1.2.x86_64 # test using just build package (with even lower release number, than installed zlib-32bit) $ zypper dup -r zlib-test Loading repository data... Reading installed packages... Computing distribution upgrade... The following NEW package is going to be installed: libz1-32bit The following package is going to be REMOVED: zlib-32bit The following package is going to be downgraded: libz1 The following package is going to change vendor: libz1 openSUSE -> obs://build.opensuse.org/devel:libraries:c_c++ 1 package to downgrade, 1 new, 1 to remove, 1 to change vendor. Overall download size: 101.7 KiB. No additional space will be used or freed after the operation. Continue? [y/n/?] (y): So ignore the downgraded and vendor change lines, they won't appear in official packages. Submitted to Factory: 157346 -- 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=806310 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806310#c2 Christian Boltz <suse-beta@cboltz.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|FIXED | --- Comment #2 from Christian Boltz <suse-beta@cboltz.de> 2013-03-05 13:34:34 CET --- Hmm, I'm not sure if a unversioned obsoletes is the best idea. Yes, it works, but it also means that it will never ever possible to install a package named "zlib-32bit" again as long as libz1-32bit is installed. Specifying the version (hardcoded to the latest version with the old name) might be the better choice, like Obsoletes: zlib-32bit <= 1.2.7 -- 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=806310 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806310#c3 Michal Vyskocil <mvyskocil@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Michal Vyskocil <mvyskocil@suse.com> 2013-03-05 13:44:08 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2)
Hmm, I'm not sure if a unversioned obsoletes is the best idea. Yes, it works, but it also means that it will never ever possible to install a package named "zlib-32bit" again as long as libz1-32bit is installed.
I would say the risc is quite low - especially if libz1-32bit is made from zlib.src.rpm.
Specifying the version (hardcoded to the latest version with the old name) might be the better choice, like Obsoletes: zlib-32bit <= 1.2.7
As you wish - 157375 -- 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=806310 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806310#c4 Christian Boltz <suse-beta@cboltz.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |VERIFIED --- Comment #4 from Christian Boltz <suse-beta@cboltz.de> 2013-03-05 18:41:06 CET --- (In reply to comment #3)
As you wish - 157375
:-) Thanks! Verified by checking the code change in the SR. -- 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=806310 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806310#c5 Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bwiedemann@suse.com --- Comment #5 from Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> 2013-03-06 10:43:10 CET --- https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/157375 Factory / zlib -- 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.
participants (1)
-
bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com