Bug 15923

Summary:	impossibility to install the above kernel (desktop and server)
Product:	Mageia	Reporter:	igor ivanov <algaraad>
Component:	RPM Packages	Assignee:	Mageia Bug Squad <bugsquad>
Status:	RESOLVED INVALID	QA Contact:
Severity:	normal
Priority:	Normal	CC:	thierry.vignaud
Version:	4
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	x86_64
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Source RPM:	kernel-desktop(server)-3.14.39-1.mga4-1-1.mga4.x86_64.rpm	CVE:
Status comment:

Description igor ivanov 2015-05-13 15:02:07 CEST

Description of problem: when typing under root "urpmi kernel-server-3.14.39-1.mga4-1-1.mga4.x86_64.rpm" an error message is returned; the same for the desktop version of this kernel


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


How reproducible:
[root@mageia4_64 toto]# urpmi kernel-server-3.14.39-1.mga4-1-1.mga4.x86_64.rpm
impossible d'accéder au fichier rpm [kernel-server-3.14.39-1.mga4-1-1.mga4.x86_64.rpm]
erreur lors de l'inscription des paquetages locaux

[root@mageia4_64 toto]# urpmi kernel-desktop-3.14.39-1.mga4-1-1.mga4.x86_64.rpm
impossible d'accéder au fichier rpm [kernel-server-3.14.39-1.mga4-1-1.mga4.x86_64.rpm]
erreur lors de l'inscription des paquetages locaux


Steps to Reproduce: see above
1.
2.
3.


Reproducible: 

Steps to Reproduce:

Comment 1 Thierry Vignaud 2015-05-13 15:52:57 CEST

This is now how urpmi works.
Here, you're calling "urpmi <filename>" which will fail if <filename> doesn't exist in the _current_ directoruy.
What you want to actually use is "urpmi <package_name>".
ie "foobar" instead of "foobar-version-release.arch.rpm"

eg:
urpmi kernel-server-3.14.39-1.mga4
instead of:
urpmi kernel-server-3.14.39-1.mga4-1-1.mga4.x86_64.rpm

Status: NEW => RESOLVED
CC: (none) => thierry.vignaud
Resolution: (none) => INVALID

Thierry Vignaud 2015-05-13 15:53:13 CEST

Component: New RPM package request => RPM Packages
Severity: major => normal

Comment 2 igor ivanov 2015-05-13 16:50:58 CEST

(In reply to Thierry Vignaud from comment #1)
> This is now how urpmi works.
> Here, you're calling "urpmi <filename>" which will fail if <filename>
> doesn't exist in the _current_ directoruy.
> What you want to actually use is "urpmi <package_name>".
> ie "foobar" instead of "foobar-version-release.arch.rpm"
> 
> eg:
> urpmi kernel-server-3.14.39-1.mga4
> instead of:
> urpmi kernel-server-3.14.39-1.mga4-1-1.mga4.x86_64.rpm

Sorry, you wrong:

[root@mageia4_64 toto]# urpmi kernel-desktop-3.14.39-1.mga4
Pas de paquetage nommé kernel-desktop-3.14.39-1.mga4

[root@mageia4_64 toto]# urpmi kernel-server-3.14.39-1.mga4
Pas de paquetage nommé kernel-server-3.14.39-1.mga4

but this package DOES exist (check by yourself)

and also:

[root@mageia4_64 alain4]# urpmi kernel-desktop-3.14.41-1.mga4
Pas de paquetage nommé kernel-desktop-3.14.41-1.mga4
[root@mageia4_64 alain4]# urpmi kernel-server-3.14.41-1.mga4
Pas de paquetage nommé kernel-server-3.14.41-1.mga4

and the latter do exist too!

Comment 3 Rémi Verschelde 2015-05-13 17:02:49 CEST

(In reply to igor ivanov from comment #2)
> (In reply to Thierry Vignaud from comment #1)
> > This is now how urpmi works.
> > Here, you're calling "urpmi <filename>" which will fail if <filename>
> > doesn't exist in the _current_ directoruy.
> > What you want to actually use is "urpmi <package_name>".
> > ie "foobar" instead of "foobar-version-release.arch.rpm"
> > 
> > eg:
> > urpmi kernel-server-3.14.39-1.mga4
> > instead of:
> > urpmi kernel-server-3.14.39-1.mga4-1-1.mga4.x86_64.rpm
> 
> Sorry, you wrong:

No, he is not.
Either your Core Updates repository is not enabled, or missing, or it is not up-to-date.

Comment 4 Rémi Verschelde 2015-05-13 17:04:53 CEST

"# urpmi kernel-desktop-3.14.39-1.mga4" works fine in my Mageia 4 chroot when Core Updates is active.

Comment 5 igor ivanov 2015-05-13 17:19:33 CEST

REALLY REALLY SORRY, but I've just noticed that the box "core update" was mysteriously unchecked in my database.
Please don't take into account of this "bug"
Everything OK now

Comment 6 Rémi Verschelde 2015-05-13 17:37:28 CEST

No problem, we prefer users who report invalid bugs than users who do not report bugs at all. So don't hesitate to open a bug report next time you think something is not working as it should ;-)

Comment 7 David Walser 2015-05-13 21:30:12 CEST

We've also had several reports the last few months on IRC where people had their Core Release mysteriously disabled.  There's a real bug somewhere...

Comment 8 igor ivanov 2015-11-01 13:31:10 CET

(In reply to Rémi Verschelde from comment #6)
> No problem, we prefer users who report invalid bugs than users who do not
> report bugs at all. So don't hesitate to open a bug report next time you
> think something is not working as it should ;-)

thank you for looking at bug 17049