Bug 1034842 - Upgrade a package specified in "Activation Key -> Packages" during registration if an older release is already installed
Summary: Upgrade a package specified in "Activation Key -> Packages" during registrati...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: Spacewalk
Classification: Community
Component: Clients
Version: 2.1
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Milan Zázrivec
QA Contact: Red Hat Satellite QA List
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: space27
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-11-26 15:30 UTC by Lionel Le Folgoc
Modified: 2017-09-28 18:11 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-02-24 10:01:11 UTC
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Lionel Le Folgoc 2013-11-26 15:30:27 UTC
Hi,

During the initial registration to spacewalk, if a package is specified in "Activation Key -> Packages" for the key used and already installed on the system at an older release, rhnreg_ks won't trigger an upgrade of the package to the latest release. This used to work in the past.

For example:
- package foo 1.0-1 on the player
- latest release on the spacewalk channels is foo 1.1-1
- the activation key X-BAR-MYKEY contains "foo" in "Activation Key -> Packages".
- rhnreg_ks --activationkey X-BAR-MYKEY on the player
- we expect foo to be upgraded to 1.1-1, but it's still 1.0-1.

This was working in Spacewalk/yum-rhn-plugin 1.2 (e.g., fc14 systems), but doesn't work anymore in e.g. Spacewalk/yum-rhn-plugin 1.9 (e.g., fc17 and fc18 systems).

The regression is apparently caused by commit ea84c915032450b540b1dd47c8062a6cfc4c3d11 <https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/spacewalk.git/commit/client/rhel/yum-rhn-plugin?id=ea84c915032450b540b1dd47c8062a6cfc4c3d11>. I couldn't find any bug referencing that commit, nor does its commit message reference any bug report.

I rebuilt yum-rhn-plugin 1.9.4 locally, reverting the above commit, and the registration behaves as expected/previously (foo is upgraded to 1.1-1).
I couldn't find any "new" bug during my (limited) testing with this patched package.

Could this behavior be reintroduced somehow?
This would be rather useful to force an upgrade of a known broken/outdated package during registration (like what happened with one version of rhnsd having an incomplete systemd service file (Missing Type=forking) on fc17, causing rhnsd to not start on some systems).

Thanks!

Comment 1 Lionel Le Folgoc 2014-02-24 10:01:11 UTC
After some more testing, I can see why this was introduced (if some/all packages are already installed, the initial deployment will fail). Closing.

Comment 2 Eric Herget 2017-09-28 18:11:48 UTC
This BZ closed some time during 2.5, 2.6 or 2.7.  Adding to 2.7 tracking bug.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.