Bug 566029

Summary:	Spacewalk sees only small portion of updateable packages
Product:	[Community] Spacewalk	Reporter:	Erik Logtenberg <erik>
Component:	WebUI	Assignee:	Michael Mráka <mmraka>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Red Hat Satellite QA List <satqe-list>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	0.8	CC:	cperry, jpazdziora, mmraka
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:	2011-01-28 15:04:03 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:	653453

Description Erik Logtenberg 2010-02-16 22:42:31 UTC

Description of problem:

I have a Fedora 12 x86_64 system registered with my Spacewalk (0.8 nightly) server, and disabled all /etc/yum.repos.d/*.repo's. This way the system only sees the packages from the spacewalk server.
On the spacewalk server, I have mirrored Fedora 12 and Fedora 12 updates channels, and also a channel for the latest rhn-client tools.

Now spacewalk sees that there are 31 package updates available. But when I issue a yum update on the client, there are 145 updates plus 4 new installs.
So spacewalk apparenly only sees a very small portion of these updates, even though it does have all the new packages available.

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

0.8 nightly server on a Fedora 12 x86_64 os.

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install a fedora 12 machine from just the base channel (this way there are many updates available)
2. Register the fedora 12 machine with spacewalk, and make sure it's registered for the fedora 12 and fedora 12 updates channels
3. Observe that yum update will see many updates (even with all default repositories disabled - so the updates yum sees are all actually available through the spacewalk server
4. Observe that spacewalk sees only a small portion of these possible updates

Comment 1 Erik Logtenberg 2010-05-06 08:28:32 UTC

I still have this same issue. In the mean time the nightly builds have gone up from 0.8.x to 0.9.x to 1.1.x, but apart from that I'm still using the previously mentioned environment (Fedora 12, x86_64, clean fresh install).

For my information, just to be 100% sure:

If I do "yum update" on a somewhat outdated client, not registered with Spacewalk, but simply using the Fedora 12 repositories, then I see for instance 20 updates.

If I register this same client to Spacewalk, which has Fedora 12 repositories mirrored (fully up to date), and I disable the original Fedora 12 repositories on the client (so it only uses Spacewalk): am I correct in assuming that the Spacewalk should see the exact same 20 updates?

I want to make sure that my expectation is correct in this regard.

The actual results are that Spacewalk sees only a small portion of these updates or sometimes no updates at all. It does know which version of each package is installed on the client and it also knows that it has newer versions, but in the update packages overview multiple updates are missing.

Comment 2 Erik Logtenberg 2010-08-18 09:04:55 UTC

I notice that this is considered a blocking bug (blocks: spaceXX), however the 'XX'-part keeps moving forward, without a single reply from a developer.

Is there more information needed, is anyone able to reproduce? Are my expectations about Spacewalk behaviour correct to begin with?
(is posting these bug reports appreciated?)

Comment 3 Jan Pazdziora (Red Hat) 2010-11-19 16:05:09 UTC

Mass-moving to space13.

Comment 4 Jan Pazdziora (Red Hat) 2010-11-29 13:27:54 UTC

(In reply to comment #2)
> I notice that this is considered a blocking bug (blocks: spaceXX), however the
> 'XX'-part keeps moving forward, without a single reply from a developer.
> 
> Is there more information needed, is anyone able to reproduce? Are my
> expectations about Spacewalk behaviour correct to begin with?
> (is posting these bug reports appreciated?)

The bug reports are certainly appreciated. However, is some cases, like having full Fedora 12 synced into Spacewalk, they are hard to digest by the developers.

Could you try again with Spacewalk 1.2 first, as there were multiple changes going into the errata cache part of the system.

Would you be able to demostrate the problem with a small set of packages?

Comment 5 Michael Mráka 2011-01-28 15:04:03 UTC

Hi Erik,

going through this bugzilla I suspect it's a dup of bug 585965 which has been resolved in Spacewalk 1.2. 
I'm going to close it, feel free to reopen it if you can still see the bug.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 585965 ***