Bug 1256232 - dnf check-update shows obsoletes which it should not show (relaxngDatatype and msv packages with jpackage-generic repopo) IMHO
dnf check-update shows obsoletes which it should not show (relaxngDatatype an...
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: dnf (Show other bugs)
Unspecified Unspecified
unspecified Severity low
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: packaging-team-maint
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2015-08-24 02:46 EDT by Jan Hutař
Modified: 2015-08-31 10:05 EDT (History)
7 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2015-08-31 10:05:20 EDT
Type: Bug
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Jan Hutař 2015-08-24 02:46:27 EDT
Description of problem:
`dnf check-update` reports some obsoletes but on packages which IMHO
should not be updated.

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

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
1. With packages installed 
2. # dnf check-update
   Obsoleting Packages
   relaxngDatatype.noarch   1.0-3.jpp5              jpackage-generic
       msv.noarch           1.2-0.20050722.6.jpp5   @System
3. # dnf upgrade
   Nothing to do.

Actual results:
`dnf check-update` complains abbout relaxngDatatype-1.0-3.jpp5 obsolete,
but I have relaxngDatatype-2011.1-1.fc22.noarch installed (which should
be of a newer version).

Expected results:
IMHO `dnf check-update` should only report issues with unrelated packages.

Additional info:
I do not know if this is dnf issue, libsolv issue or simply packaging
issue on JPackage of Fedora side. Also maybe this is just me reading
`dnf check-update` output incorrectly.

This is what these packages obsoletes:

# rpm -q relaxngDatatype-2011.1-1.fc22 --obsoletes
# rpm -qp relaxngDatatype-1.0-3.jpp5.noarch.rpm --obsoletes

Just in case this is important - one of the package doesn't seem to
have epoch set but looks like dnf understands it correctly:

# rpm -qi relaxngDatatype-2011.1-1.fc22 | grep Epoch
# rpm -qpi relaxngDatatype-1.0-3.jpp5.noarch.rpm | grep Epoch
Epoch       : 0

# dnf info relaxngDatatype-2011.1-1.fc22 | grep -e 'Epoch' -e 'Repo' -e 'From repo'
This system is not registered with Spacewalk server.
Spacewalk based repositories will be disabled.
Epoch       : 0
Repo        : @System
From repo   : fedora
# dnf info relaxngDatatype-1.0-3.jpp5 | grep -e 'Epoch' -e 'Repo' -e 'From repo'
This system is not registered with Spacewalk server.
Spacewalk based repositories will be disabled.
Epoch       : 0
Repo        : jpackage-generic

And mine JPackage repo file is:

# cat /etc/yum.repos.d/jpackage-generic.repo 
name=JPackage generic
Comment 1 Honza Silhan 2015-08-31 10:05:20 EDT
IIUC the relation is following:
msv (installed) < relaxngDatatype-1.0-3.jpp5 < relaxngDatatype-2011.1-1.fc22 (installed)

DNF couldn't know what state is better (more updated) for the user.
It could be "relaxngDatatype-1.0-3.jpp5" or "msv AND relaxngDatatype-2011.1-1.fc22".
(in any case at least one package is obsoleted / in lower version than package available)

Thanks DNF that you give hints and let the user decide!

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