Bug 1675 - MageiaUpdate doesn't show updates while using urpmi comand it works
Summary: MageiaUpdate doesn't show updates while using urpmi comand it works
Status: RESOLVED INVALID
Alias: None
Product: Mageia
Classification: Unclassified
Component: RPM Packages (show other bugs)
Version: 1
Hardware: i586 Linux
Priority: Normal critical
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Mageia Bug Squad
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
: 1840 1853 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-06-07 19:22 CEST by Marcello Anni
Modified: 2011-06-19 15:13 CEST (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Source RPM: mgaonline
CVE:
Status comment:


Attachments

Description Marcello Anni 2011-06-07 19:22:30 CEST
Description of problem:

hi,

i've noticed that using mageiaupdate it doesn't prompt any updates for my mageia 1, while if i use urpmi --auto-update comand i have no problems... Tell me if you need more info

cheers,
Marcello
Comment 1 Ahmad Samir 2011-06-07 19:37:33 CEST
MageiaUpdate only considers "updates" sources, whereas urpmi --auto-update considers all "enabled" sources.

There are no updates for Mageia 1 ATM, so it's expected that MageiaUpdate will show nothing.

Status: NEW => RESOLVED
Resolution: (none) => INVALID

Comment 2 Marcello Anni 2011-06-09 12:35:49 CEST
how come they are uploaded in the /release tree even if they are updates??
Comment 3 James Kerr 2011-06-09 13:18:50 CEST
Do you have the tainted repo enabled? If so then packages from /tainted/release will be reported (by urpmi and rpmdrake, but not Mageia Update) as updates to the equivalent packages in /core/release. This is so that people who want to use those packages instead of the core packages can do so.

This is similar to what happened on Mandriva, where plf packages were reported as updates to the equivalent official packages.
Comment 4 Sander Lepik 2011-06-17 21:49:00 CEST
*** Bug 1840 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

CC: (none) => eagle150

Comment 5 Bicycle RepairMan 2011-06-17 21:56:07 CEST
"MageiaUpdate only considers "updates" sources, whereas urpmi --auto-update
considers all "enabled" sources."

Well, why is that? Obviously that is a bug. Why was this (and the other bugreport) marked as invalid? It is not invalid at all!

Urpmi --auto-update is supposed to...well, automatically update packages, just as the MCC function should. So please explain to me why you don't consider that a bug?
Comment 6 Sander Lepik 2011-06-17 22:06:19 CEST
Testing and Backports sources are not marked as update repos by default.

Check /etc/urpmi/urpmi.cfg

Repos that have update line in their conf are checked by MCC. So you can add it manually and it will work. But by default those are not marked as update repos as they can harm system if used wrongly :)

CC: (none) => sander.lepik

Comment 7 Bicycle RepairMan 2011-06-17 22:14:36 CEST
Yes, I get that, but still, backports and testing-repos are not installed by default, are they? If they are not installed by default, that means that the user has to activate them manually. So I don't really see why the MCC should show different results than the Console, since there is no real danger for newbies to destroy their system anyways. Advanced users may want to check what updates are in backports or testing via MCC for different reasons and IMHO they shouldn't have to mess around with the config-file to do so...

well, that is my opinion, anyways, thanks for giving yours.
Comment 8 Sander Lepik 2011-06-17 22:19:20 CEST
When you add default repos they will be all listed. Unchecked but still listed. I already saw a forum post where one novice user suggested to select a lot of those mirrors. I'm not sure how many fallowed but if those repos would have update ability. I don't wanna think about that. If you are advanced user you can enable those and have no problem. If you are novice user following some dumb advice you may crash your system really bad.
Comment 9 Ahmad Samir 2011-06-17 22:36:47 CEST
(In reply to comment #5)
> "MageiaUpdate only considers "updates" sources, whereas urpmi --auto-update
> considers all "enabled" sources."
> 
> Well, why is that? Obviously that is a bug. Why was this (and the other
> bugreport) marked as invalid? It is not invalid at all!
> 
> Urpmi --auto-update is supposed to...well, automatically update packages, just
> as the MCC function should. So please explain to me why you don't consider that
> a bug?

It's no a bug because */release repos are _never_ changed after the official release of a distro (Mageia 1 in this case), updated packages go to */updates.
Comment 10 Ahmad Samir 2011-06-17 22:38:50 CEST
(In reply to comment #7)
> Yes, I get that, but still, backports and testing-repos are not installed by
> default, are they? If they are not installed by default, that means that the
> user has to activate them manually. So I don't really see why the MCC should
> show different results than the Console, since there is no real danger for
> newbies to destroy their system anyways. Advanced users may want to check what
> updates are in backports or testing via MCC for different reasons and IMHO they
> shouldn't have to mess around with the config-file to do so...
> 
> well, that is my opinion, anyways, thanks for giving yours.

Users don't necessarily need to edit any config files if they want to, you can use drakrpm-edit-media configure the repos any way you want (in some cases you have to use 'drakrpm-edit-media --expert').
Comment 11 Ahmad Samir 2011-06-17 22:40:05 CEST
I forgot to say that rpmdrake has a Backports filter, which shows packages from backports repos even if they're disabled, it's done this way to make it easier for users to install packages from Backports.
Comment 12 Bicycle RepairMan 2011-06-17 22:45:00 CEST
"It's no a bug because */release repos are _never_ changed after the official
release of a distro (Mageia 1 in this case), updated packages go to */updates."
Yes, I know that, but I fail to see how that is relevant. The same packages are in backports, so I asumed MCC and Console should show the same results, but Sander Lepik explained why that isn't the case.

But what Ahmad Samir is saying kind of contradicts that: Do you want to protect users from "destroying" their system with the backports or do you want to make it easy to install packages from backports? I don't think you can do both, so which one is it? I think you maybe should have a discussion about that if you haven't already.
Comment 13 Sander Lepik 2011-06-17 23:10:12 CEST
Users can search for backported packages and install them one by one. But they won't get installed as updates so it would replace bunch of packages w/o user knowing. That is not good practice..
Ahmad Samir 2011-06-18 00:48:03 CEST

Source RPM: mageiaupdate => mgaonline

Comment 14 Sander Lepik 2011-06-19 15:13:43 CEST
*** Bug 1853 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

CC: (none) => isis2000


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