Hi Dominique, On Thu, 2024-04-04 at 09:37 +0200, Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
On Wed, 2024-04-03 at 16:17 -0400, Joe Salmeri wrote:
Yes, I saw that and I updated my systems using the update repo the other day.
What I am trying to understand is why was an even earlier version of xz ( 5.4-2.1 ) merged into the main repo instead of using the same version ( 5.4-3.2 ) of xz that was put into the update repo ?
the VERSION is the same. The RPM names are in the form NVR - Name- Version-Release.
In this specicic case: Name = xz Version = 5.6.1.revertto5.4 Release = 2.1
The release in turn is split in two pieces: CICount.RebuildCount
openSUSE:Factory:Update is an overlay over openSUSE:Factory and the source from :Factory is 'branched' into :Update - which implies it is 'one commit on OBS' later than the version in :Factory (hence 2 -> 3 change). In both cases, the package has built only once, so they were offered a .1 suffix.
What was the reason for falling back to an even older version ?
The :Update was removed again (as all code is in the main tree) - and thus you 'fall back' to the version that was in Factory.
It's not just a version number difference because the 5.4-2.1 version is 13% smaller in size than the 5.4-3.2 version.
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 100K Apr 3 15:56 /.snapshots/6/snapshot/usr/bin/xz -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 87K Mar 28 09:51 /.snapshots/7/snapshot/usr/bin/xz
Observant you are! Well spotted.
The difference is that openSUSE:Factory:Update does not split out - debuginfo packages - so the binaries are not stripped.
Not really an issue - but I corrected :Update prj meta data to split debuginfo in the future too. This shold then help eliminate further such confusions.
Thanks a lot for the elaborate and detailed explanation. Out of curiosity: Why does Factory actually have an Update repository? Is it to be able to provide expedited updates for Tumbleweed necessary for occasions like the xz backdoor without having to wait for a new Tumbleweed snapshot? Adrian