Bug 962935

Summary: confusing usage of epoch in spacewalk-backend package
Product: Red Hat Satellite 5 Reporter: Jan Hutař <jhutar>
Component: ServerAssignee: Jan Pazdziora <jpazdziora>
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact: Red Hat Satellite QA List <satqe-list>
Severity: low Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 560CC: jpazdziora
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-05-15 05:51:16 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:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 924189    

Description Jan Hutař 2013-05-14 19:27:30 UTC
Description of problem:
spacewalk-backend package "provides" numerous versioned provides like "rhns = 1:1.7.38-45.el6sat" (including epoch), but package itself do not have epoch set (to "1").


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
spacewalk-backend-1.7.38-45.el6sat.noarch.rpm


How reproducible:
always


Steps to Reproduce:
$ rpm -qp --qf="%{EPOCH}\n" spacewalk-backend-1.7.38-45.el6sat.noarch.rpm
(none)
$ rpm -qp --provides spacewalk-backend-1.7.38-45.el6sat.noarch.rpm | grep '= [0-9]\+:'
rhns = 1:1.7.38-45.el6sat
rhns-common = 1:1.7.38-45.el6sat
spacewalk-backend-upload-server = 1:1.7.38-45.el6sat


Actual results:
See above. IMO package should either define "epoch = 1", or provide versioned provides without epoch specified. In case this is expected and wanted state, please close this bug.


Expected results:
Packages epoch ane epoch in versioned provide should match.

Comment 2 Jan Pazdziora 2013-05-15 05:51:16 UTC
(In reply to comment #0)
> Description of problem:
> spacewalk-backend package "provides" numerous versioned provides like "rhns
> = 1:1.7.38-45.el6sat" (including epoch), but package itself do not have
> epoch set (to "1").

That's exactly expected. The spacewalk* packages have replaced the rhns* packages. The spacewalk* packages versioning started from 0.1 while rhns* were at 5.2 or similar.

Thus, saying that spacewalk* in epoch 0 provides rhns* in epoch 1 is actually correct, and it ensures that upon upgrade, rhns* packages get removed.

> Actual results:
> See above. IMO package should either define "epoch = 1", or provide
> versioned provides without epoch specified. In case this is expected and
> wanted state, please close this bug.
> 
> Expected results:
> Packages epoch ane epoch in versioned provide should match.

No. spacewalk != rhns.