Bug 455759

Summary: xmlrpc call delta_packages checks wrong list for package removals
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Reporter: Martin Poole <mpoole>
Component: yum-rhn-pluginAssignee: Pradeep Kilambi <pkilambi>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact:
Severity: high Docs Contact:
Priority: high    
Version: 5.0CC: cperry, jplans, pkilambi, tao
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2009-01-20 21:54:50 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 455760    

Description Martin Poole 2008-07-17 16:24:43 UTC
Description of problem:

changes to packages on client machines are communicated to satellite via the
xmlrpc call "delta_packages"  The data supplied with the call is in two lists
"added" and "removed"  Unfortunately satellite checks for the lists "added" and
"deleted" so it never sees when packages are removed leaving zombie entries in
the WebGUI (and DB).

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

5.1

How reproducible:

Always.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. yum remove yum-updatesd
2.
3.
  
Actual results:

package is not removed from installed list on satellite.

Expected results:

package should be removed from list.

Additional info:

on the clients in /usr/lib/yum-plugins/rhnplugin.py in the make_package_delta
function it initialises as follows.
    delta = {}
    delta["added"] = []
    delta["removed"] = []

on the server in /usr/share/rhn/server/handlers/xmlrpc/registration.py in the
delta_packages handler it retrieves
        added_packages = packages.get('added')
        removed_packages = packages.get('deleted')

Comment 13 errata-xmlrpc 2009-01-20 21:54:50 UTC
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2009-0195.html