Bug 562722

Summary:	RHNS530: 'Sync to System Profile' fails to add packages, if you remove few packages from the Profile Sync
Product:	Red Hat Satellite 5	Reporter:	Issue Tracker <tao>
Component:	Server	Assignee:	Justin Sherrill <jsherril>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Red Hat Satellite QA List <satqe-list>
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	high
Version:	530	CC:	cperry, mosvald, tao, tlestach, vgaikwad, xdmoon
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2010-05-19 09:04:42 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:

Comment 4 Vishal Gaikwad 2010-02-08 07:15:05 UTC

Public Summary:

Package profile sync not working as expected. When syncing a profile with an
existing system which has difference of custom and RHEL packages - then package
profile sync doesn't work. It fails with message "There are no packages to
sync"

How Reproducible
Always

Steps to reproduce :
Select a system profile ->Software -> Profile ->  *Compare to System* -> 
Select a system -> Compare

Select all the packages [rhel and custom] -> Schedule sync 

As we are having custom package which is not pushed to satellite it displays
those custom packages and  gives 2 options :

"Remove listed packages from Sync" or "Subscribe to channel"

Clicking on "Remove listed packages from sysnc" 

Observed Behavior
Sync process exits the sync process saying "No packages for Sync"

Expected Behaviour :
It should remove those custom packages from the list and move ahead with the
sync of remaining packages.

Comment 5 Vishal Gaikwad 2010-02-08 07:18:46 UTC

Workaround:

A workaround is to create a Stored Profile for the system to which you would like to compare the packages. Sync Packages to Stored Profile work fine.

Comment 7 Tomas Lestach 2010-05-19 09:04:42 UTC

The fix for this problem was shipped in errata:

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2010-0369.html

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 572277 ***