Op woensdag 22 maart 2023 13:46:21 CET schreef Frank McCormick:

Attempted a zypper dup on my installation this morning. I got this error messagage on one of the repositories.

Warning: File 'repomd.xml' from repository 'openSUSE:Factory' is unsigned.

Note: Signing data enables the recipient to verify that no modifications occurred after the data were signed. Accepting data with no, wrong or unknown signature can lead to a corrupted system and in extreme cases even to a system compromise.

Note: File 'repomd.xml' is the repositories master index file. It ensures the integrity of the whole repo.

Warning: We can't verify that no one meddled with this file, so it might not be trustworthy anymore! You should not continue unless you know it's safe.

File 'repomd.xml' from repository 'openSUSE:Factory' is unsigned, continue? [yes/no] (no): Retrieving repository 'openSUSE:Factory' metadata ............................................................................ ....................[error] Repository 'openSUSE:Factory' is invalid. [http-download.opensuse.org-fa10a0de|http://download.opensuse.org/tumbleweed /repo/oss/] Valid metadata not found at specified URL History: - Signature verification failed for repomd.xml - Can't provide /repodata/repomd.xml

Please check if the URIs defined for this repository are pointing to a valid repository. Warning: Skipping repository 'openSUSE:Factory' because of the above error.

Then zypper told me it was going to upgrade 2063 packages!! It didn't seem reasonable to me so I aborted the upgrade.

What should I have done ? Has anyone else experienced this?

Thanks

First a remark. I don't have a repository openSUSE:Factory. What is the URL in that repo? I also experience problems with unsigned or unavailable repomd.xml for Tumbleweed. So after the second warning I was asked to continue or abort; I aborted. -- fr.gr. member openSUSE Freek de Kruijf

On 3/22/23 09:01, Knurpht-openSUSE wrote:

Op woensdag 22 maart 2023 13:46:21 CET schreef Frank McCormick:

...

Attempted a zypper dup on my installation this morning. I got this error messagage on one of the repositories.

Warning: File 'repomd.xml' from repository 'openSUSE:Factory' is unsigned.

Note: Signing data enables the recipient to verify that no modifications occurred after the data

...

Then zypper told me it was going to upgrade 2063 packages!! It didn't seem reasonable to me so I aborted the upgrade.

this is caused by a full rebuild due to changing to gcc13. That said, you should not have an openSUSE:Factory repo. Please post output of "zypper lr -d" on paste.opensuse.org and post the resulting URL here.

Someone else questioned why I have 'openSUSE:Factory' in my repos. As fas as I know it's been in the list for a long time. As to how it got there I have no idea. This is the url for the zypper command "zypper lr -d" https://paste.opensuse.org/pastes/7f631951c1b8 Thanks

Frank McCormick wrote:

Then zypper told me it was going to upgrade 2063 packages!! It didn't seem reasonable to me so I aborted the upgrade.

What should I have done ? Has anyone else experienced this?

Only 1370 packages to be upgraded, otherwise no issues.

File 'repomd.xml' from repository 'openSUSE:Factory' is unsigned, continue? [yes/no] (no): Retrieving repository 'openSUSE:Factory' metadata ..................................................................error] Repository 'openSUSE:Factory' is invalid. [http-download.opensuse.org-fa10a0de|

...

http://download.opensuse.org/tumbleweed/repo/oss/]

I wonder if maybe a mirror isn't quite ready? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (18.0°C) Member, openSUSE Heroes (2016 - present) We're hiring - https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Heroes

Knurpht-openSUSE wrote:

Op woensdag 22 maart 2023 14:25:22 CET schreef Per Jessen:

...

I wonder if maybe a mirror isn't quite ready?

Nope, look at the op's zypper lr -d

Yeah, I just did, but apart from a lot of repos and some duplicates, I don't see any real issue. the 'zypper dup' reported an issue with 'repomd.xml' from opensuse:factory = http://download.opensuse.org/tumbleweed/repo/oss/ I don't see that, hence my suggestion that Franks copy might have come from a different mirror. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (18.4°C) Member, openSUSE Heroes (2016 - present) We're hiring - https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Heroes

Per Jessen wrote:

the 'zypper dup' reported an issue with 'repomd.xml' from opensuse:factory = http://download.opensuse.org/tumbleweed/repo/oss/

I don't see that, hence my suggestion that Franks copy might have come from a different mirror.

I've just tried a 2nd system - 2609 packages to upgrade, but no issue with repomd.xml -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.4°C) Member, openSUSE Heroes (2016 - present) We're hiring - https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Heroes

Andrei Borzenkov wrote:

On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 4:36 PM Per Jessen wrote:

...

no issue with repomd.xml

IIRC in Tumbleweed zypper should log resolved mirrors.

I know exactly which mirror mine is coming from - my own :-) The complaint about repomd.xml "being unsigned" seems to be the main issue - missing a signature, somewhere? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.4°C) Member, openSUSE Heroes (2016 - present) We're hiring - https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Heroes

On 3/22/23 09:25, Per Jessen wrote:

Frank McCormick wrote:

...

Then zypper told me it was going to upgrade 2063 packages!! It didn't seem reasonable to me so I aborted the upgrade.

What should I have done ? Has anyone else experienced this?

Only 1370 packages to be upgraded, otherwise no issues.

I just did the dup...no errors on any repos this time and more than 2100 packages to update/install. All went well this time but took quite a while.

...

File 'repomd.xml' from repository 'openSUSE:Factory' is unsigned, continue? [yes/no] (no): Retrieving repository 'openSUSE:Factory' metadata ..................................................................error] Repository 'openSUSE:Factory' is invalid. [http-download.opensuse.org-fa10a0de|

...

http://download.opensuse.org/tumbleweed/repo/oss/]

I wonder if maybe a mirror isn't quite ready?

That must have been the case.

On 3/22/23 09:17, Knurpht-openSUSE wrote:

Op woensdag 22 maart 2023 14:12:57 CET schreef Frank McCormick:

...

This is the url for the zypper command "zypper lr -d"

https://paste.opensuse.org/pastes/7f631951c1b8 22 Repos ..... To be honest, that is a mess. At least remove the *Factory* repos,

The second dup went without problems. So far I haven't removed any repos. that said also look at all the other non-distro repos. Remove whatever

holds packages that are in the distro repos, then run sudo zypper dup --allow-vendor-change. Create a btrfs snapshot before performing the operation.

I am about to do that partly because repo refresh is taking a while.

On 2023-03-22 15:46, Frank McCormick wrote:

 Doesn't work here.

You don't need sudo to that. Just run it as your normal user.

I don't use repo aliases...might that be the problem?

The repos have aliases -- /bengan

On 2023-03-22 16:35, Frank McCormick wrote:

Sorry. Still doesn't work.

Ok. Maybe I've made something that only works here. You could try with only enabled repos by number: for i in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 21 22;do echo -n $i:\ ;zypper --no-refresh se --installed-only --repo $i | grep ^i| wc -l;done -- /bengan

Bengt Gördén wrote:

On 2023-03-22 16:35, Frank McCormick wrote:

...

Sorry. Still doesn't work.

Ok. Maybe I've made something that only works here.

Nah, it works - it's just that your one-liner got folded into a three liner, I think. Well, it kind of works - on my test system, it reports only 88 packages installed :-) -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.1°C) Member, openSUSE Heroes (2016 - present) We're hiring - https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Heroes

On 2023-03-22 17:59, Per Jessen wrote:

zypper --no-refresh se --installed-only - reports 2725 packages. zypper --no-refresh se --installed-only --repo download.o.o-oss - only 88. (none from the other two repos).

Very strange. Now I also get strange results. I don't remember having it before. When I tested a couple of hours ago, I had a little over 2000 packages and now I only have 92. -- /bengan

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 El 2023-03-22 a las 15:33 +0100, Bengt Gördén escribió:

On 2023-03-22 14:17, Knurpht-openSUSE wrote:

...

...

This is the url for the zypper command "zypper lr -d"

https://paste.opensuse.org/pastes/7f631951c1b8 22 Repos ..... To be honest, that is a mess. At least remove the *Factory* repos, that said also look at all the other non-distro repos. Remove whatever holds packages that are in the distro repos, then run sudo zypper dup --allow-vendor-change. Create a btrfs snapshot before

Op woensdag 22 maart 2023 14:12:57 CET schreef Frank McCormick: performing the operation.

Frank,

As Knurpht says, it might be a good idea to go through your set of repos. I have a bunch of weird repos but I live with them and keep an eye on them. But I would suggest you start by checking how many installed packages you actually have in each of them. I made myself a small one-liner a few years ago to deal with that.

for i in `zypper --no-refresh lr -E | awk -F\| '{print $2}' | grep -v -e ^$ -e Alias`;do echo -n $i:\ ;zypper --no-refresh se --installed-only --repo $i | grep ^i| wc -l;done

Interesting concoction. cer@Telcontar:~> for i in `zypper --no-refresh lr -E | awk -F\| '{print $2}' | grep -v -e ^$ -e Alias`;do echo -n $i:\ ;zypper --no-refresh se --installed-only --repo $i | grep ^i| wc -l;done Ext_Packman: 159 LocalRPMs_15.2: 0 Local_RPMs: 3 OBS_Education: 1 OBS_Emulators_Wine: 3 OBS_Games: 10 OBS_Games_tools: 0 OBS_KDE3: 13 OBS_KDE_extra: 4 OBS_Science: 0 OBS_devel_languages_pascal: 8 OBS_devel_languages_perl: 15 OBS_graphics: 0 OBS_home_sbradnick: 0 OBS_network_utilities: 1 OBS_server_mail: 8 OBS_utilities: 6 X11_Pantheon_Apps: 3 devel_languages_nodejs: 1 devel_languages_python: 0 devel_languages_python_backports: 2 google-chrome: 1 opensuse-guide.org-repo: 1 repo-backports-update: 131 repo-non-oss: 4 repo-oss: 8713 repo-sle-update: 2341 repo-update: 31 repo-update-non-oss: 0 cer@Telcontar:~> So you produce a list of repos by aliases: zypper --no-refresh lr -E | awk -F\| '{print $2}' | grep -v -e ^$ -e Alias Then add a ": " cer@Telcontar:~> echo OBS_devel_languages_pascal | echo -n $i:\ ; repo-update-non-oss: cer@Telcontar:~> cer@Telcontar:~> Ah, print repo name without new line. Finally, generate list of packages from that repo: cer@Telcontar:~> echo -n "repo-update-non-oss: " ; zypper --no-refresh se --installed-only --repo OBS_devel_languages_pascal repo-update-non-oss: Loading repository data... Reading installed packages... S | Name | Summary | Type - ---+-----------------+------------------------------------------+-------- i+ | fpc | Free Pascal Compiler | package i+ | fpc-doc | Freepascal Compiler documentation | package i+ | fpc-examples | Freepascal Compiler examples | package i+ | fpc-src | Freepascal Compiler - sources | package i+ | lazarus | FreePascal RAD IDE and Component Library | package i+ | libQt5Pas-devel | Free Pascal interface to Qt5 | package i+ | libQt5Pas1 | Free Pascal interface to Qt5 | package i+ | peazip | Graphical file archiver | package cer@Telcontar:~> and a count of lines. (grep ^i| wc -l) Ah, grep of the letter 'i' at the start of the line. What I am interested in is in the list of packages by repo :-) I think can adapt that to a script to produce a number of files (named using the alias) with the list. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. (from openSUSE 15.4 x86_64 at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHoEARECADoWIQQZEb51mJKK1KpcU/W1MxgcbY1H1QUCZBtX7Bwccm9iaW4ubGlz dGFzQHRlbGVmb25pY2EubmV0AAoJELUzGBxtjUfVkTwAnRQ8ppQ0CPMpzzU9Rato 5IA5pBWxAJ94GG1X9s6pMLq+1twQmid2ZcoZRg== =DFGw -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, 2023-03-22 at 20:50 +0100, Per Jessen wrote:

Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

What I am interested in is in the list of packages by repo :-)

zypper se --installed-only --repo yourrepo

Yes, that's what he does: ...; zypper --no-refresh se --installed-only --repo $i Then basically count the lines.

There is also a sort option to sort by repo instead of package name.

Ah. search (se) ... --sort-by-name Sort packages by name (default). --sort-by-repo Sort packages by repository, not by name. cer@Telcontar:~> zypper --no-refresh se --installed-only --sort-by-repo | head Loading repository data... Reading installed packages... S | Name | Summary | Type - ---+-----------------------------------------------+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+-------- i+ | 4pane | A multi-pane detailed-list file manager | package i | 4pane-lang | Translations for package 4pane | package i+ | a2ps | Tool to convert ASCII/Latin Text into PostScript | package i+ | aaa_base | openSUSE Base Package | package i+ | aaa_base-extras | SUSE Linux Base Package (recommended part) | package cer@Telcontar:~> Hum. Not very useful actually, the repo information is not printed. And apparently, can not output a .csv list. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. (from openSUSE 15.4 x86_64 at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHoEARECADoWIQQZEb51mJKK1KpcU/W1MxgcbY1H1QUCZBteehwccm9iaW4ubGlz dGFzQHRlbGVmb25pY2EubmV0AAoJELUzGBxtjUfVJioAnjBLDgyMiU9g7+wPMXoH tq92LSySAJ9gdvtLSi54ybJtIKhNA9TCOmNP5A== =4LJf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 El 2023-03-22 a las 21:13 +0100, Stephan Hemeier escribió:

You can do it in many versions, see man zypper or zypper se --help.

Examples

The Repo to serach for:

zypper lr -d | grep -i repo-non-oss 4 | repo-non-oss | Non-OSS Repository | Ja | (r ) Ja | Ja | 99 | rpm-md | http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/leap/15.4/repo/non-oss/ |

Sure, but I want the list of all packages from all repos, sorted by repo, indicating which repo each thing comes from, and hopefully, in both tabulated format and csv format :-)

And now:

zypper se -sir 4 Repository-Daten werden geladen... Installierte Pakete werden gelesen...

S | Name | Type | Version | Arch | Repository ---+-------+-------+-----------------+--------+------------------- i+ | unrar | Paket | 6.1.6-lp154.1.1 | x86_64 | Non-OSS Repository

I prefer long options, specially on the mail list, as they say something about what they do, and are easier to find in the manual. -i, --installed-only Show only installed packages. -r, --repo alias|name|#|URI Work only with the repository specified by the alias, name, number, or URI. This option can be used multiple times. -s, --details Show all available versions of matching packages, each version in each repository on a separate line. cer@Telcontar:~> zypper --no-refresh search --installed-only --sort-by-repo --details | head --lines=100 Loading repository data... Reading installed packages... S | Name | Type | Version | Arch | Repository - ---+-----------------------------------------------+---------+-----------------------------------------------------+--------+------------------------------------------------------------- il | antivir | package | 2.1.10.15-58.1.1 | i586 | (System Packages) il | binkd | package | 0.9.4-1 | i686 | (System Packages) il | BinkleyTermXE | package | v2.60XE-Beta_XH6 | i686 | (System Packages) i+ | cgrep | package | 8.15-2.1 | x86_64 | (System Packages) i+ | cinelerra | package | 5.1-20180430 | x86_64 | (System Packages) il | fidoconf | package | 0.10c-1 | i686 | (System Packages) i | gmanedit | package | 0.4.2-1.3.lk | x86_64 | (System Packages) i+ | howto | package | 2007.1.1-41 | noarch | (System Packages) i+ | howtoenh | package | 2007.1.1-41 | noarch | (System Packages) il | hpt | package | 0.9.7d-1 | i686 | (System Packages) il | hptutil | package | hptutil-1 | i686 | (System Packages) i+ | java-1_8_0-openjdk | package | 1.8.0.362-150000.3.76.1 | x86_64 | (System Packages) i+ | java-1_8_0-openjdk-headless | package | 1.8.0.362-150000.3.76.1 | x86_64 | (System Packages) i | jDictionary | package | 1.80-812 | noarch | (System Packages) i | jDictionary-SmartEngSpa | package | 1.0-825 | noarch | (System Packages) il | libmysqlclient18 | package | 10.0.35-35.1 | x86_64 | (System Packages) i+ | mediatomb | package | 0.12.1.svn2103-pm154.18.5 | x86_64 | (System Packages) i+ | mediatomb-mysql | package | 0.12.1.svn2103-pm154.18.5 | x86_64 | (System Packages) il | multiload-ng-base | package | 743885d.git-lp153.3.1 | x86_64 | (System Packages) il | multiload-ng-xfce4 | package | 743885d.git-lp153.3.1 | x86_64 | (System Packages) i | pkpgcounter | package | 2.17-3.1 | i586 | (System Packages) i | python-sip-common | package | 4.19.19-1.52 | x86_64 | (System Packages) il | regionset | package | 0.2-lp150.1.1 | x86_64 | (System Packages) il | rekall | package | 2.4.6-118.54 | x86_64 | (System Packages) il | rekall-examples | package | 2.4.6-118.54 | x86_64 | (System Packages) il | rekall-mysql | package | 2.4.6-118.54 | x86_64 | (System Packages) il | rekall-postgresql | package | 2.4.6-118.54 | x86_64 | (System Packages) il | rekall-sqlite | package | 2.4.6-118.54 | x86_64 | (System Packages) il | rekall-xbase | package | 2.4.6-118.54 | x86_64 | (System Packages) il | smapi | package | 2.0.0-1 | i686 | (System Packages) i+ | wine | package | 8.3-lp154.1556.10 | x86_64 | (System Packages) i+ | wine-32bit | package | 8.3-lp154.1556.10 | x86_64 | (System Packages) i+ | xpdf | package | 3.03-6.1 | x86_64 | (System Packages) i+ | amrwb | package | 11.0.0.0-pm154.2.4 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | asunder | package | 2.9.7-pm154.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | autopano-sift-C | package | 2.5.1-pm154.3.2 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | avidemux3 | package | 2.8.1-pm154.2.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | avidemux3-cli | package | 2.8.1-pm154.2.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | avidemux3-qt5 | package | 2.8.1-pm154.2.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | avidemux3-qt5-lang | package | 2.8.1-pm154.2.1 | noarch | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | BitTorrent | package | 4.4.0-pm154.4.2 | noarch | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | BitTorrent-curses | package | 4.4.0-pm154.4.2 | noarch | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | dvgrab | package | 3.5-pm154.13.3 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | faac | package | 1.30-pm154.1.4 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | faad2 | package | 2.10.0-pm154.1.4 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | ffmpeg-3 | package | 3.4.12-pm150400.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | ffmpegyag | package | 0.7.6.git20170503-pm154.2.2 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | flash-player | package | 32.0.0.465-pm154.3.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | gdk-pixbuf-loader-libheif | package | 1.15.1-pm154.6.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | GeneralUser | package | 1.471-pm154.1.1 | noarch | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | gimp-plugin-heif | package | 1.1.0+git20191012.d6bea52-pm154.2.7 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | gmerlin | package | 1.2.0rsvn4256-pm154.5.3 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | gmerlin-recorder | package | 1.2.0rsvn4256-pm154.5.3 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | gmplayer | package | 1.2.r38304-pm154.3.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | gstreamer-plugins-bad-codecs | package | 1.20.1-pm154.3.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | gstreamer-plugins-ugly-codecs | package | 1.20.1-pm154.1.5 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | handbrake-gtk | package | 1.5.1-pm154.1.4 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | handbrake-gtk-lang | package | 1.5.1-pm154.1.5 | noarch | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | heif-examples | package | 1.15.1-pm154.6.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | kodi | package | 20.1-pm150400.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | kodi.binary-addons | package | 20.1-pm150400.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | kodi.binary-addons-audiodecoder.timidity | package | 20.1-pm150400.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libaften0 | package | 0.0.8.git20110104-pm154.1.2 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libamrnb3 | package | 11.0.0.0-pm154.3.4 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libamrwb3 | package | 11.0.0.0-pm154.2.4 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavcodec57 | package | 3.4.12-pm150400.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavcodec57-debuginfo | package | 3.4.12-pm150400.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavcodec58_134 | package | 4.4-pm154.3.14.2 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavdevice57 | package | 3.4.12-pm150400.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavdevice58_13 | package | 4.4-pm154.3.14.2 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavfilter6 | package | 3.4.12-pm150400.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavfilter6-debuginfo | package | 3.4.12-pm150400.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavfilter7_110 | package | 4.4-pm154.3.14.2 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavformat57 | package | 3.4.12-pm150400.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavformat57-debuginfo | package | 3.4.12-pm150400.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavformat58_76 | package | 4.4-pm154.3.14.2 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavresample3 | package | 3.4.12-pm150400.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavresample3-debuginfo | package | 3.4.12-pm150400.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavresample4_0 | package | 4.4-pm154.3.14.2 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavutil55 | package | 3.4.12-pm150400.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavutil55-debuginfo | package | 3.4.12-pm150400.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libavutil56_70 | package | 4.4-pm154.3.14.2 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libdca0 | package | 0.0.7-pm154.1.4 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libdcadec0 | package | 0.2.0-pm154.2.4 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libdcaenc0 | package | 2-pm154.2.2 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libde265-0 | package | 1.0.9-pm154.1.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libdvdplay0 | package | 1.0.1-pm154.5.2 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libdvdread3 | package | 0.9.7-pm154.9.2 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libfaac0 | package | 1.30-pm154.1.4 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libfaad2 | package | 2.10.0-pm154.1.4 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libfdk-aac2 | package | 2.0.2-pm154.1.3 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libgmerlin0 | package | 1.2.0rsvn4256-pm154.5.3 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libgmerlin_gtk0 | package | 1.2.0rsvn4256-pm154.5.3 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libheif1 | package | 1.15.1-pm154.6.1 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository i+ | libmac2 | package | 3.99_u4_b5_s7-pm154.5.2 | x86_64 | EXT: Packman Repository cer@Telcontar:~> Not bad. What I can hope to attain with my script is something like this: - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ Repo: System Packages | - ---+-----------------------------------------------+---------+-----------------------------------------------------+--------+ S | Name | Type | Version | Arch | - ---+-----------------------------------------------+---------+-----------------------------------------------------+--------+ il | antivir | package | 2.1.10.15-58.1.1 | i586 | il | binkd | package | 0.9.4-1 | i686 | il | BinkleyTermXE | package | v2.60XE-Beta_XH6 | i686 | - ---------------------------------------------------+---------+-----------------------------------------------------+--------+ Repo: EXT: Packman - ---+-----------------------------------------------+---------+-----------------------------------------------------+--------+ S | Name | Type | Version | Arch | - ---+-----------------------------------------------+---------+-----------------------------------------------------+--------+ i+ | amrwb | package | 11.0.0.0-pm154.2.4 | x86_64 | i+ | asunder | package | 2.9.7-pm154.1.1 | x86_64 | i+ | autopano-sift-C | package | 2.5.1-pm154.3.2 | x86_64 | I still miss the info from the openSUSE release. And csv format. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. (from openSUSE 15.4 x86_64 at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHoEARECADoWIQQZEb51mJKK1KpcU/W1MxgcbY1H1QUCZBt1Qxwccm9iaW4ubGlz dGFzQHRlbGVmb25pY2EubmV0AAoJELUzGBxtjUfVybIAnRuL42OXQUOk1i3fz0zr hzS7+NL6AJwJ8+pkUUZo/d424n0RK6SiEGV3Hw== =rPuT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Bengt Gördén wrote:

On 2023-03-22 17:59, Per Jessen wrote:

...

zypper --no-refresh se --installed-only - reports 2725 packages. zypper --no-refresh se --installed-only --repo download.o.o-oss - only 88. (none from the other two repos).

Very strange. Now I also get strange results. I don't remember having it before. When I tested a couple of hours ago, I had a little over 2000 packages and now I only have 92.

With the zypper '--details' options, I see the repository for most of my packages listed as "(System Packages)" - 2633 out of 2726. I wonder if maybe the repo information was lost at some point? by a change of repos? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (13.9°C) Member, openSUSE Heroes (2016 - present) We're hiring - https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Heroes

On 2023-03-23 07:53, Per Jessen wrote:

Bengt Gördén wrote:

...

On 2023-03-22 17:59, Per Jessen wrote:

...

zypper --no-refresh se --installed-only - reports 2725 packages. zypper --no-refresh se --installed-only --repo download.o.o-oss - only 88. (none from the other two repos).

Very strange. Now I also get strange results. I don't remember having it before. When I tested a couple of hours ago, I had a little over 2000 packages and now I only have 92.

With the zypper '--details' options, I see the repository for most of my packages listed as "(System Packages)" - 2633 out of 2726. I wonder if maybe the repo information was lost at some point? by a change of repos?

Yes. I wondered about that too. Before I went to bed I did another one-liner and sorted by repo. On my dev machine (infrequently updated) I have: zypper se -si | grep ^i | awk -F\| '{print $6}' | sort | uniq -c 9755 (System Packages) 1 Application Geo) (openSUSE_Tumbleweed) 1 Build signal-desktop with OBS (openSUSE_Tumbleweed) 3 Geekos DAW (openSUSE_Tumbleweed) 1 Multimedia Applications (openSUSE_Tumbleweed) 1 Packman Repository 1 Visual Studio Code 1 brave-browser 5 home:ecsos 38 localrpm 19 openSUSE-Tumbleweed-Oss 19 openSUSE:Tumbleweed -- /bengan

On 2023-03-23 08:03, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 9:54 AM Per Jessen wrote:

...

With the zypper '--details' options, I see the repository for most of my packages listed as "(System Packages)" - 2633 out of 2726. I wonder if maybe the repo information was lost at some point? by a change of repos?

"Repository" is just a guess. If a package is not present in any repository (exact installed version) when you query it, it is considered "System Package". So Tumbleweed was updated, the repository contains different package versions and installed packages became "orphaned".

Ah. Right. I have to admit I haven't read the man page thoroughly enough. It clearly states: System Packages The set of installed packages on a system is sometimes denoted as repository @System or System Packages. In contrast to available repositories providing packages which can be installed, @System provides packages which can only be deleted. Installed packages which are not also provided by at least one of the available repositories are often denoted as being unwanted, orphaned or dropped. The use of --repo is not recommended in several cases in the man page, but not in search. I wonder if it's the same with searches? Here is under the installation section: "Using --repo is discouraged as it currently hides unmentioned repositories from the resolver, leading to inexpertly decisions. In the future --repo will become an alias for --from." -- /bengan

On 2023-03-23 07:48, Per Jessen wrote:

Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

I still miss the info from the openSUSE release. And csv format.

csv is easily done:

zypper se -si | grep '^i' | sed -e 's/ *| */,/g'

Ah, you speak sed-esse. I don't :-} Thanks. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.4 x86_64 at Telcontar)

On 2023-03-23 10:23, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 12:15 PM Robert Webb via openSUSE Users wrote:

...

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 10:03:13 +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:

...

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 9:54 AM Per Jessen wrote:

...

With the zypper '--details' options, I see the repository for most of my packages listed as "(System Packages)" - 2633 out of 2726. I wonder if maybe the repo information was lost at some point? by a change of repos?

"Repository" is just a guess. If a package is not present in any repository (exact installed version) when you query it, it is considered "System Package". So Tumbleweed was updated, the repository contains different package versions and installed packages became "orphaned".

"Orphaned" until the next dup, right? So this is not a reliable way to correlate your installed packages with the repos they came from.

There is no reliable way to do it in the general case.

...

But zypper does seem to know which repo an installed package was from, because it has the '--allow-vendor-change' option.

You confuse "vendor" and "repository".

...

Then how to access the source repo info that is in the locally saved information about installed packages?

I do not understand that question.

That we'd like a way to print, for a package, the repository name by correlating with the vendor information. Yes, I know what you say next :-)

...

BTW, does "vendor" actually mean "repository", like I assume?

No. "Vendor" is RPM package property which is set when a package is built. "Repository" does not exist on RPM level at all, it is something higher level package managers (like zypper or yum) understand.

There could be multiple repositories from the same vendor - the most obvious example is main and update repositories for an openSUSE release. Zypper does not really care from which local repository definition package comes from.

-- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.4 x86_64 at Telcontar)

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 11:33:12 +0100, "Carlos E. R." wrote:

On 2023-03-23 10:23, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:

...

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 12:15 PM Robert Webb via openSUSE Users wrote:

...

   Then how to access the source repo info that is in the locally saved information about installed packages?

I do not understand that question.

That we'd like a way to print, for a package, the repository name by correlating with the vendor information.

OK, at least it should be possible to get the list of packages installed, or a count of packages, per each vendor, instead of per repo. -- Robert Webb

On 2023-03-23 11:50, Robert Webb via openSUSE Users wrote:

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 11:33:12 +0100, "Carlos E. R." wrote:

...

On 2023-03-23 10:23, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:

...

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 12:15 PM Robert Webb via openSUSE Users wrote:

...

   Then how to access the source repo info that is in the locally saved information about installed packages?

I do not understand that question.

That we'd like a way to print, for a package, the repository name by correlating with the vendor information.

OK, at least it should be possible to get the list of packages installed, or a count of packages, per each vendor, instead of per repo.

Yes, you can get that from the rpm command. I have a one liner (split in several to cope with mail line wrapping) that produces an rpm list sorted by date, in csv format (not pure): rpm -q -a --queryformat "%{INSTALLTIME};%{INSTALLTIME:day}; \ %{BUILDTIME:day}; %{NAME};%{VERSION}-%-7{RELEASE};%{arch}; \ %{VENDOR};%{PACKAGER};%{DISTRIBUTION};%{DISTTAG}\n" \ | sort | cut --fields="2-" --delimiter=\; \ | tee rpmlist.csv | less -S or table format: rpm -q -a --queryformat "%{INSTALLTIME}\t%{INSTALLTIME:day} \ %{BUILDTIME:day} %-30{NAME}\t%15{VERSION}-%-7{RELEASE}\t%{arch} \ %25{VENDOR}%25{PACKAGER} == %{DISTRIBUTION} %{DISTTAG}\n" \ | sort | cut --fields="2-" | tee rpmlist | less -S and a variation that lists those packages that are not for the current release: rpm -q -a --queryformat "%{INSTALLTIME}\t%{INSTALLTIME:day} \ %{BUILDTIME:day} %-30{NAME}\t%15{VERSION}-%-7{RELEASE}\t%{arch} \ %25{VENDOR}%25{PACKAGER} == %{DISTRIBUTION} %{DISTTAG}\n" \ | sort | cut --fields="2-" | tee rpmlist \ | egrep -v "openSUSE Leap 15\.4|openSUSE_Leap_15.4|\-lp153|SUSE Linux Enterprise 15" | less -S Doesn't catch all, because some DISTAGS are different: server:mail / 15.4 (none) openSUSE:Leap:15.4:NonFree devel:languages:pascal / 15.4 (none) The sort field is easy to change, it is the first field. Let's try with "vendor": rpm -q -a --queryformat "%{VENDOR}\t%{INSTALLTIME:day} \ %{BUILDTIME:day} %-30{NAME}\t%15{VERSION}-%-7{RELEASE}\t%{arch} \ %25{VENDOR}%25{PACKAGER} == %{DISTRIBUTION} %{DISTTAG}\n" \ | sort | cut --fields="2-" | tee rpmlist | less -S or rpm -q -a --queryformat "%{VENDOR};%{INSTALLTIME:day}; \ %{BUILDTIME:day}; %{NAME};%{VERSION}-%-7{RELEASE};%{arch}; \ %{VENDOR};%{PACKAGER};%{DISTRIBUTION};%{DISTTAG}\n" \ | sort | cut --fields="2-" --delimiter=\; \ | tee rpmlist.csv | less -S Now, obtaining the current repository name I don't know. Perhaps obtaining, separately, a list of vendor vs repository name, and do the correlation on the list as a second phase. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.4 x86_64 at Telcontar)

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 10:17:30 +0100, Bengt Gördén wrote:

On 2023-03-23 08:03, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:

...

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 9:54 AM Per Jessen wrote:

...

With the zypper '--details' options, I see the repository for most of my packages listed as "(System Packages)" - 2633 out of 2726.  I wonder if maybe the repo information was lost at some point?  by a change of repos?

"Repository" is just a guess. If a package is not present in any repository (exact installed version) when you query it, it is considered "System Package". So Tumbleweed was updated, the repository contains different package versions and installed packages became "orphaned".

Ah. Right. I have to admit I haven't read the man page thoroughly enough. It clearly states:

System Packages The set of installed packages on a system is sometimes denoted as repository @System or System Packages. In contrast to available repositories providing packages which can be installed, @System provides packages which can only be deleted. Installed packages which are not also provided by at least one of the available repositories are often denoted as being unwanted, orphaned or dropped.

The use of --repo is not recommended in several cases in the man page, but not in search. I wonder if it's the same with searches? Here is under the installation section:

"Using --repo is discouraged as it currently hides unmentioned repositories from the resolver, leading to inexpertly decisions. In the future --repo will become an alias for --from."

The problem with this 'zypper search' command is that the set of installed packages (--installed-only option) that are in the repository (--repo X) shrinks over time as the repo gets updated, with older package versions removed.  This continues until you sync to the repo again with 'zypper dup'.  But even then, the result may not show all the installed packages that came from repo X, if they are not in that repo anymore. -- Robert Webb

On 2023-03-23 12:30, Robert Webb via openSUSE Users wrote:

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 10:17:30 +0100, Bengt Gördén wrote:

...

On 2023-03-23 08:03, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:

...

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 9:54 AM Per Jessen wrote:

...

With the zypper '--details' options, I see the repository for most of my packages listed as "(System Packages)" - 2633 out of 2726.  I wonder if maybe the repo information was lost at some point?  by a change of repos?

"Repository" is just a guess. If a package is not present in any repository (exact installed version) when you query it, it is considered "System Package". So Tumbleweed was updated, the repository contains different package versions and installed packages became "orphaned".

Ah. Right. I have to admit I haven't read the man page thoroughly enough. It clearly states:

System Packages The set of installed packages on a system is sometimes denoted as repository @System or System Packages. In contrast to available repositories providing packages which can be installed, @System provides packages which can only be deleted. Installed packages which are not also provided by at least one of the available repositories are often denoted as being unwanted, orphaned or dropped.

The use of --repo is not recommended in several cases in the man page, but not in search. I wonder if it's the same with searches? Here is under the installation section:

"Using --repo is discouraged as it currently hides unmentioned repositories from the resolver, leading to inexpertly decisions. In the future --repo will become an alias for --from."

The problem with this 'zypper search' command is that the set of installed packages (--installed-only option) that are in the repository (--repo X) shrinks over time as the repo gets updated, with older package versions removed.  This continues until you sync to the repo again with 'zypper dup'.  But even then, the result may not show all the installed packages that came from repo X, if they are not in that repo anymore.

Then try my vendor concoction I posted, using rpm. It just has to be improved to correlate vendor string with repository string ;-) -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.4 x86_64 at Telcontar)

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 14:23:00 +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 1:33 PM Robert Webb via openSUSE Users wrote:

...

Thank you for the clarity.  It's strange, though, because we "choose" a vendor for a package by enabling and setting priorities on a set of repos.

No, you do not - at least, very indirectly. Priorities define in which order zypper checks whether a repository has a required package. So for *new* packages (not yet installed) the first repository that offers a suitable package will define the vendor of this package. Once a package is installed, zypper will not switch its vendor by default so repository priorities do not matter - zypper will always use the repository which has the new version from the same vendor.

For already installed packages, do the repository priorities affect whether the vendor is changed by the following operation [1], assuming that a plain 'zypper dup' was done immediately prior to adding the Packman repository?     zypper dup --from packman --allow-vendor-change Also, for this to be consistent, each package would have to be switched to Packman whether or not the Packman version is newer, correct? [1] https://en.opensuse.org/Additional_package_repositories#Packman     "After adding packman repository be sure to switch system package     to those in packman ..." -- Robert Webb