On Mittwoch, 28. Februar 2024, 17:39:31 CET Adrian Schröter wrote:
On Mittwoch, 28. Februar 2024, 17:32:21 CET Andreas Schwab wrote:
On Feb 28 2024, Adrian Schröter wrote:
On Donnerstag, 15. Februar 2024, 17:13:13 CET Bernhard M. Wiedemann via openSUSE Factory wrote:
On 15/02/2024 14.31, Larry Len Rainey wrote:
Getting this today (repo list at bottom)
zypper dup
'apparmor-docs-3.1.7-1.1.noarch.rpm' [/var/tmp/AP_0xi8dYFp/noarch/apparmor-docs-3.1.7-1.1.noarch.rpm]
expected afe4d69e9749e1798412c520c01b266856af22bf8a9f3342c33368dd224e1b0b9f3b24f5c330de85290e2db31b8ab083466fe6363a06e8bf0aa519f13884feae but got 33c05a3a7c0232392229d52abdd78d7d1106fb4eb312e820731f67747b9e2d89253ec3a941bf7169b6ec29fe92d64355b10296b94a9b7f26ee1760dfa1baa7cf
This is fallout from the version bump when packages got replaced with a different version under the same name. It is still a ToDo to get OBS to create proper numbering e.g. fix https://github.com/openSUSE/open-build-service/issues/15079
erm, even when you always have the same revision number for the checkin counter, you should still have a different build counter.
Are you sure that this is not a different issue here?
It can also happen when a noarch (sub-)package is republished, but from a build by a different architecture.
yes, but the publisher is usually taking care of this and does not switch it.
wipebinaries calls can lead to such problems though, since there is no former binary anymore. Do you run these? -- Adrian Schroeter <adrian@suse.de> Build Infrastructure Project Manager SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Frankenstraße 146, 90461 Nürnberg, Germany (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg) Geschäftsführer: Ivo Totev