[zypp-devel] Updating vendors
Hi, should we realy not upgrade these vendors: Discarding 'U__s_[S1:1][package]kdenetwork3-news-3.5.7-46.i586' from vendor 'SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany' different to uninstalled 'openSUSE Build Service' vendor. Discarding 'U__s_@[S1:1][package]dvd+rw-tools-7.0-43.i586' from vendor 'SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany' different to uninstalled 'suse' vendor. Discarding 'U__s_@[S1:1][package]agrep-0.7.5-31.i586' from vendor 'SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany' different to uninstalled 'SuSE Linux AG, Nuernberg, Germany' vendor. Additional there are "empty" vendors which will not be upgraded too: Discarding 'U__s_@[S2:0][pattern]non_oss-10.3-118.i586' from vendor 'SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany' different to uninstalled '' vendor. Discarding 'U__s_@[S1:1][package]libdv-1.0.0-6.i586' from vendor 'SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany' different to uninstalled '' vendor. I think it is a little bit to much restricted. Any opinions ? Greetings Stefan -- ******************************************************************************* Stefan Schubert SUSE LINUX GmbH - Maxfeldstrasse 5 - D-90409 Nuernberg, Germany e-mail: schubi@suse.de ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: zypp-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: zypp-devel+help@opensuse.org
On Monday 03 September 2007 10:19:27 Stefan Schubert wrote:
Hi, should we realy not upgrade these vendors:
Discarding 'U__s_[S1:1][package]kdenetwork3-news-3.5.7-46.i586' from vendor 'SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany' different to uninstalled 'openSUSE Build Service' vendor. Discarding 'U__s_@[S1:1][package]dvd+rw-tools-7.0-43.i586' from vendor 'SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany' different to uninstalled 'suse' vendor. Discarding 'U__s_@[S1:1][package]agrep-0.7.5-31.i586' from vendor 'SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany' different to uninstalled 'SuSE Linux AG, Nuernberg, Germany' vendor.
perhaps we should introduce a vendor compare function instead of using == everywhere. VendorAttr already has the code to compare a vendor with a vendor in the trusted list, using only the first characters, and in lower case. Then you can even change the behavior to read a compatibility table.
Additional there are "empty" vendors which will not be upgraded too: Discarding 'U__s_@[S2:0][pattern]non_oss-10.3-118.i586' from vendor 'SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany' different to uninstalled '' vendor. Discarding 'U__s_@[S1:1][package]libdv-1.0.0-6.i586' from vendor 'SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany' different to uninstalled '' vendor.
same here. Michael will take care of that :-) Duncan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: zypp-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: zypp-devel+help@opensuse.org
Hi,
On 03-09-2007 at 11:19, Stefan Schubert <schubi@suse.de> wrote: Discarding 'U__s_[S1:1][package]kdenetwork3-news-3.5.7-46.i586' from vendor 'SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany' different to uninstalled 'openSUSE Build Service' vendor. Discarding 'U__s_@[S1:1][package]dvd+rw-tools-7.0-43.i586' from vendor
Well, I don't think it would be wise to 'trust' just all the repos in the BS like this. This cross grade is something I like to have control, without the need to verify all the time. from BS to SUSE Linux, I see it different; but even there, that will mean it cripples my packages sometimes down to unusable again.
'SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany' different to uninstalled 'suse' vendor.
I guess that vendor anyhow should not exist in this form. Could not THIS be the problem? Why not fix those packages (apparently they are internal packages?) but introduce complexity to the program?
Discarding 'U__s_@[S1:1][package]agrep-0.7.5-31.i586' from vendor 'SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany' different to uninstalled 'SuSE Linux AG, Nuernberg, Germany' vendor.
That one is sane I'd say. A cross-grade here should be allows.
Additional there are "empty" vendors which will not be upgraded too: Discarding 'U__s_@[S2:0][pattern]non_oss-10.3-118.i586' from vendor 'SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany' different to uninstalled '' vendor.
Comes again the question why is there an empty vendor in something provided by the original SUSE Packages. Dominique TMF is a global management and accounting outsourcing firm with 73 offices in 57 countries and over 2,000 professionals (2007). TMF is expanding rapidly throughout the world. Learn more about our unique network and our services and visit our website at www.tmf-group.com. The information contained in this e-mail communication is confidential and solely intended for the person to whom it is addressed. If someone other than the intended recipient should receive or come into possession of this e-mail communication, he/she will not be entitled to read, disseminate, disclose or duplicate it. If you are not the intended recipient, you are requested to notify the sender and to destroy the original e-mail communication. TMF is neither liable for the correct and complete transmission of the information contained in this e-mail communication nor for any delay in its receipt. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been checked for the presence of computer viruses. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: zypp-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: zypp-devel+help@opensuse.org
participants (3)
-
Dominique Leuenberger -
Duncan Mac-Vicar Prett -
Stefan Schubert