Description of Problem: If you run up2date on a system which has an enterprise entitlement as opposed to a personal entitlement, then you will get error code 31 (system not entitled.) Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How Reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual Results: Expected Results: Additional Information:
I'm not exactly sure who's bug this is. The question is this: If all enterprise entitlements are also supposed to provide "update assistant" functionality, why don't we just make the product provide one of each? I was told not to do this, of course, but it may still be the right answer...
what exactly is it that the client should be doing different in this case? I'm not aware of any difference in the way system ids are created for enterprise setups or otherwise.
this is teh server side - I am looking explicitly for the label of the software manager service might be usefull to hack in some sort of mapping that for each groupid that is used in entitlement we add a flag that tells us whether up2date is functioning or not - or figure out how to implement roles. right now looks like we have three services that are being provided: Software manager, update assistant and Systems Manager. As we add more we'll need to be able to qualify those roles somehow.
Changing this to the correct component.
In the web code, the standard emerging method for telling if a system is viewable is to see if the entitlement check returns "none" or not. As entitlements change, I'm guessing that the one constant rule will be this: any system that is in *any* way entitled to RHN will be entitled to receive updates. Therefore, the "none" check should remain valid in all cases.
Jay, has this bug been closed?
This bug could not possibly still be open.
Indeed, this has been fixed for quite some time. Closing out.