Mailinglist Archive: zypp-devel (149 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [zypp-devel] vendor
  • From: Michael Matz <matz@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 14:30:35 +0200 (CEST)
  • Message-id: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0809021420160.6093@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, Stanislav Visnovsky wrote:

Dňa Tuesday 02 September 2008 09:55:53 Martin Vidner ste napísal:

I have tried to update oS 11.0 to SLES 11 Alpha2 using zypper dup.

Apples to oranges? Please, don't do that.

The proposed transaction only contained a dozen of packages, and it
turned out that zypp thinks the SLES packages have no vendor
specified. Is that a known bug? (Or a "feature"?)

Hard to tell with such crazy scenario.

That's not a crazy scenario at all IMO. Though zypper dup is not the
official distupgrade way, and we don't officially support upgrading to
alphas or beta anyway (though I've always done that for instance), libzypp
should behave "reasonable" in these circumstances. And I don't consider
the described behaviour such.

If nothing else it points to a problem in meta-data generation if the
packages from SLE11 really have no vendor or no known one.

Consequently the solver thought that I would be changing the vendor of
all packages and did not allow to update them. So I thought never
mind, there I see a mention of "vendors.d" in the log file where I
should be able to say that the empty vendor is equivalent to "SUSE
LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany".

But there is no documentation :( (And after reading the code I suspect
that it is unusable because it assumes the vendor name does not
contain a comma.) Is this supposed to work at all?

That seems a unfortunate yes. The comparison function falls back to
substring comparison and lowercasing, though, so I think "SUSE.*" should
already match "suse". Must be debugged :-)

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups