Bug 1427165

Summary:	[RFE] pulp download repository with verify-all-units downloads all rpms for on_demand repos
Product:	Red Hat Satellite	Reporter:	Justin Sherrill <jsherril>
Component:	Pulp	Assignee:	satellite6-bugs <satellite6-bugs>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	jcallaha
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	high
Version:	6.2.7	CC:	bbuckingham, jcallaha, mhrivnak
Target Milestone:	Unspecified	Keywords:	FutureFeature, Triaged
Target Release:	Unused
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2017-03-12 17:08:30 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Justin Sherrill 2017-02-27 13:55:45 UTC

Description of problem:

Currently it has been suggested to use verify-all-units to validate rpms.  This seems to work well, except any on_demand repository will be completely downloaded during the process.  This is not desired, as we would only want the already downloaded packages to be corrected.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

pulp 2.8.7 - Satellite 6.2 (but not a feature currently implemented in katello)

Comment 1 Justin Sherrill 2017-02-27 14:23:10 UTC

As part of this we need to handle two scenarios when verifying all units:

* Immediate download policy
* On Demand download policy
* Background download policy

For immediate and background, we would want all rpms to be downloaded.  For on_demand we would not.

Comment 3 Michael Hrivnak 2017-03-12 17:08:30 UTC

I think the "download_repository" task should always download the full repository. If we need a way to just verify the files for packages that have previously been downloaded, that would be a new and separate feature. I think that's covered under this issue:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223023

So I'm going to mark this as a duplicate, but feel free to re-open if you think that's not the case.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1223023 ***