openSUSE Software Management July 2008

softwaremgmt@lists.opensuse.org

14 participants
8 discussions

[softwaremgmt] distributed source packages
by Duncan Mac-Vicar P. 25 Jul '08

25 Jul '08

See "Fedora and distributed source packages" at http://lwn.net/Articles/289507/ I hope this evolves, if it works someday it would be really nice for things like the build service. Duncan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+help(a)opensuse.org

1 0

[softwaremgmt] zypp-refresh
by Jan Kupec 25 Jul '08

25 Jul '08

Would anybody care if we change the zypp-refresh utility to refresh only repositories with autorefresh enabled? The issue is that currently it is used in openSUSE Updater Applet and it refreshes _all_ the repos. The question is whether it should only refresh those with 'autorefresh' enabled. https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=410791 I tend to agree that the updater should refresh only autorefresh-enabled repos, but i also think the zypp-refresh should refresh all by default. But this would mean adding another possibility (command argument) to the zypp-refresh-wrapper. On the other hand, the updater may be the only user of zypp-refresh, so we might as well just change it to refresh only the autorefresh-enabled repos and be done with it. cheers, jano -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+help(a)opensuse.org

7 9

[softwaremgmt] opensuse updater
by manchette 18 Jul '08

18 Jul '08

Hello all, I've got this tendency to think that features like opensuse updater are very convenient and can help the new (and old) users in their everyday updates process, but it looks to me so far that this function does exactly the opposit for it often times has problems... (and users are expecting it too work fluently, may be xrongly ? ) . Too bad , which i do not understand. I often have problems, which origin i'm not quite sure of and can be of various kinds : the open suse updater in itself, wrongly packaged rpms dependencies missing problems with repositories and so on ... Well, this might be a complicated subject to detect, analyse and solve for it continues. In my opinion a lack in this distro (even though people often skip this applet and use yast or zypper and the like all users are not able to do so, or do not wish to, i very often read questions asking for help about this applet including my owns , i'm thinking of problems with updating firefox which is a very commonly package and thus problem met, and recently opensuse education repo being a inconvenient ). Please let me know if i'm completely wrong or misunderstood something, or where to post in case i'm not using the right list (?) Is there a process already on to list and solve these problems ? I'm sure this could market positively for openSUSE ;) i'm so sorry i can't provide you a patch or the like as i'm not technically skilled enough . i recently posted a bug at novell's bugzilla on this osu applet (relating updates if my memory is still faithful) but no news so far, and also i can't connect to my account despite i have there 2 accounts and received ids from novell's site. Thanks for any help ;) Fabrice -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+help(a)opensuse.org

1 0

[softwaremgmt] 'zypper lu -t package' vs. 'zypper up -t package'
by Jano Kupec 17 Jul '08

17 Jul '08

Hi, here's another isssue with doing update with zypper. The difference between 'lu' and 'up' for package updates (for discussion of 'up/lu' vs. 'up/lu -t package', see this thread: [1]). Currently 'zypper lu -t package' list all packages for which a newer version exists in the repositories. But 'zypper up -t package' select for installation/upgrade only a subset from this list - packages that are actually installable/upgradable given the current set of packages and their dependencies and the set of available updates. See also [2]. The difference between these two is not that big if you deal with one vendor only (e.g. you only have openSUSE Factory repo). But if another vendors come into play, there is a problem: 'zypper up -t package' does not upgrade packages which would involve vendor changes [3]. Suggestions: 1) Make 'lu' list what 'up' would show as 'to be upgraded' in the summary + provide an option for 'lu' to show the _raw_ list of available updates as it does currently. 2) Tell why there is a difference (and what is the difference) between 'lu' and 'up' and suggest what to do. #1 is my favorite :O) Any other suggestions? Votes? cheers, jano [1] http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-softwaremgmt/2008-07/msg00004.html [2] http://lists.opensuse.org/zypp-devel/2008-06/msg00011.html [3] https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=408858 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+help(a)opensuse.org

8 10

[softwaremgmt] patch updates vs. package updates with zypper ('up' vs. 'up -t package')
by Jano Kupec 16 Jul '08

16 Jul '08

Hi, you must have heard or you are one of the people complaining about the unintuitivness of 'zypper up' and 'zypper lu'. It deafults to patches (-t patch) and if you want to update package-wise, you need to add '-t package' to the command. There is a good reason for the patch as the default: people using the official release repositories and the official update repository need no more than 'zypper up' to keep their systems patched with security and other important fixes. But a lot of people also use other repositories and also want to do the updates package-wise (according to available versions of packages). Currently they have to use 'zypper up -t package'. Which is really not straightforward. (plus there are some issues with this command for which i will start a separate thread here). There were a few suggestions how to solve this. 1) use different commands for patch updates and package updates e.g. update (up) - do package-wise update list-updates(lu) - list available package udpates patch-update (pu) - do patch-wise update patch-list (pl) - list needed patches (note that we already have 'patches' command which lists _all_ available patches. We could also add an --needed option to this command to limit the list to needed patches only, instead of creating another command. 2) make -t package the default 3) make lu/up use both '-t package -t patch' 4) live with status quo Speaking for myself, i really like #1. Any other ideas? Votes? --------------------- Oh, and there is also 'zypper up $packagename'. This currently wants to install $packagename patch. To update the package, you have to do 'zypper up -t package $packagename'. Again, solution #1 from above would solve also this. But here is also question whether 'zypper patch-update foo' should install the patch named foo or install a patch for package foo. I'd vote for the latter. I think that's it for this issue. cheers, jano https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=385990 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=404430 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=395480 + many more -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+help(a)opensuse.org

2 1

[softwaremgmt] Fedora to upgrade RPM to 4.6
by Klaus Kaempf 09 Jul '08

09 Jul '08

Announcement: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-July/msg00477.html Full changelog: http://wiki.rpm.org/Releases/4.5.90 Most interesting change from our POV: - %{_topdir} now defaults to $(HOME)/rpmbuild/, /usr/src/redhat/ is no more. - Rpm now supports "arch dependencies", so eg. foo-devel dependencies can be expressed correctly. Please wait for FPC recommendations on the subject, this needs a mass rebuild to be usable. - Rpm now collects pkg-config and libtool dependencies automatically. Initially only provides will be created to avoid creating unsolvable dependencies though. Klaus --- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+help(a)opensuse.org

1 0

Re: [softwaremgmt] How /etc/zypp/vendors.d works?
by Stefan Schubert 08 Jul '08

08 Jul '08

Funny, Klaus Kaempf has had almost the same request. So I have added: ## ## Defining directory for equivalent vendors ## ## One file in this directory reflects a group of equivalent vendors. e.G.: ## e.G. (filename is "nvidia" but could be any other name): ## ------------------------- file contains begin ----------------------- ## [main] ## ## vendors = nvidia,suse,opensuse ## ## ------------------------- file contains end ----------------------- ## Libzypp makes an string comparision whereas the beginning of the ## strings are compared only. e.G. vendor "opensuse11.0" is compatible to "opensuse". ## ## Valid values: A directory ## Default value: {configdir}/vendors.d ## # vendordir = /etc/zypp/vendors.d Christian Morales Vega schrieb: > 2008/7/8 Stefan Schubert <schubi(a)suse.de <mailto:schubi@suse.de>>: > > Christian Morales Vega schrieb: > > From my installed Packman packages, some use vedor string > > "http://packman.links2linux.de", some use > "packman.links2linux.de <http://packman.links2linux.de>", > > and one of them uses "Packman". Recently an update changed the > vendor > > from "http://packman.links2linux.de" to "packman.links2linux.de > <http://packman.links2linux.de>" and > > so zypper up -t package didn't see it. > > In /etc/zypp/zypp.conf can be read: > > ## > > ## Defining directory for equivalent vendors > > ## > > ## Valid values: A directory > > ## Default value: {configdir}/vendors.d > > ## > > # vendordir = /etc/zypp/vendors.d > > > > So, can I make libzypp interpret the three string like a single > > vendor? If so, how? I create the vendors.d dir (since the rpm > package > > doesn't) and... what I'm exactly supposed to put inside it? > > > Yes, that's a good question about a bad ducumentation. I have > added some > comments: > > ## > ## Defining directory for equivalent vendors > ## > ## One file in this directory reflects a group of equivalent > vendors. e.G.: > ## e.G. (filename = nvidia): > ## ------------------------- file contains begin > ----------------------- > ## [main] > ## > ## vendors = nvidia,suse,opensuse > ## > ## ------------------------- file contains end ----------------------- > ## > ## Valid values: A directory > ## Default value: {configdir}/vendors.d > ## > # vendordir = /etc/zypp/vendors.d > > Now is clearer, thanks. But, the comma separated strings must be the > full vendor string? > If a vendor is "Star Trek films" and another vendor is "Star Wars > films". A vendors file with "vendors = Star Trek,Star Wars" whould > make both vendors equivalents, or I need to use "vendors = Star Trek > films,Star Wars films"? > I ask because official packages use "SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, > Nuernberg, Germany". Since this vendor string has commas... there is > some way to make another vendor equivalent to the official one? > > > > Between, is /etc/zypp/zypp.conf updated? I though patchrpm were not > > used anymore, but zypp.conf still contains a "download.use_patchrpm" > > example. > > > Hm, there is some code in libzypp which asks for this flag. > mls, ma should know if it is still supported. As far I know it is not > supported anymore. > > I only asked in case the file was outdated and the vendors.d function > wasn't available anymore. Isn't really important. > -- ******************************************************************************* Stefan Schubert SUSE LINUX GmbH - Maxfeldstrasse 5 - D-90409 Nuernberg, Germany e-mail: schubi(a)suse.de ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+help(a)opensuse.org

1 0

[softwaremgmt] How /etc/zypp/vendors.d works?
by Christian Morales Vega 08 Jul '08

08 Jul '08

>From my installed Packman packages, some use vedor string "http://packman.links2linux.de", some use "packman.links2linux.de", and one of them uses "Packman". Recently an update changed the vendor from "http://packman.links2linux.de" to "packman.links2linux.de" and so zypper up -t package didn't see it. In /etc/zypp/zypp.conf can be read: ## ## Defining directory for equivalent vendors ## ## Valid values: A directory ## Default value: {configdir}/vendors.d ## # vendordir = /etc/zypp/vendors.d So, can I make libzypp interpret the three string like a single vendor? If so, how? I create the vendors.d dir (since the rpm package doesn't) and... what I'm exactly supposed to put inside it? Between, is /etc/zypp/zypp.conf updated? I though patchrpm were not used anymore, but zypp.conf still contains a "download.use_patchrpm" example. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+help(a)opensuse.org

2 1

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

openSUSE Software Management July 2008