Bug 385990

Summary:	confusing output for zypper up
Product:	[openSUSE] openSUSE 11.0	Reporter:	Josef Reidinger <jreidinger>
Component:	libzypp	Assignee:	Jan Kupec <jkupec>
Status:	RESOLVED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Duncan Mac-Vicar <dmacvicar>
Severity:	Normal
Priority:	P5 - None	CC:	coolo, kkaempf, zypp-maintainers
Version:	Factory
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	Other
OS:	Other
Whiteboard:
Found By:	---	Services Priority:
Business Priority:		Blocker:	---
Marketing QA Status:	---	IT Deployment:	---
Attachments:	the patch

Description Josef Reidinger 2008-05-02 13:04:16 UTC

zypper up have confusing output

(xfwm4 is installed)
./zypper.sh up xfwm4
Reading installed packages...
Package 'xfwm4' is not installed.
Nothing to do

./zypper.sh up -t package xfwm4
Reading installed packages...
No update candidate for 'xfwm4'.
Nothing to do.

./zypper.sh up xfce4-desktop
Reading installed packages...
Package 'xfce4-desktop' is not installed.
Nothing to do.

./zypper.sh up -t package xfce4-desktop
works.

So package 'foo' is not installed is really confusing.

Comment 1 Jan Kupec 2008-05-15 11:53:31 UTC

*** Bug 390723 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 2 Jan Kupec 2008-05-29 14:52:07 UTC

*** Bug 395073 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 3 Jan Kupec 2008-05-29 15:03:26 UTC

The problem is that zypper up [-t <kind>] <foo> still allows -t option and defaults to -t patch.

So i guess an easy way out of this would be to default to -t package if an argument is supplied and solve the rest later.

With 'the rest' i mean:
* what should zypper select if 'zypper up -t patch foo' is used? A patch foo?
  Or a patch that updates 'package foo'? (Probably the latter). Should it then say
  "patch 
* what to do (if anything) in case of patterns and products?

(i know i should have realized and brought these issues in sooner, but somehow they escaped my attention)

Comment 4 Jan Kupec 2008-05-29 15:29:07 UTC

To finish the sentence:

With 'the rest' i mean:
* what should zypper select if 'zypper up -t patch foo' is used?
  Install 'patch foo'?
  Or a patch that updates 'package foo'? (Probably the latter).
  Should it then say "patch foo not found" or "patch foo not installed"
  or "patch foo is up to date"?
  Or "no patch for package foo found"?

Comment 5 Klaus Kämpf 2008-05-29 15:51:28 UTC

Going forward, I'd rather see zypper being more package focused. For Code11, all updates will be shipped as packages. Patches 'just' provide additional information (severity, reboot needed?, etc.) and grouping (foo, foo-devel, foo-32bit, etc.) to ease presentation.

So my recommendation is to default "in" and "up" in zypper to packages and provide specific commands (i.e. "p-in", and "p-up") for patches.

Comment 6 Jan Kupec 2008-05-29 16:24:27 UTC

OK, so in the light of this, switching the default to -t package for 'update foo' is a good thing to do now? The rest after 11.0 (lu/up -t package the default)?

Comment 7 Michael Schröder 2008-05-29 16:33:37 UTC

That's for coolo to decide, CCing him.

Comment 8 Jan Kupec 2008-05-30 16:36:01 UTC

Created attachment 219221 [details]
the patch

$ zypper up zypper
Reading installed packages...

The following package is going to be upgraded:
  zypper

Comment 12 Stephan Kulow 2008-05-31 19:40:31 UTC

I wouldn't play havoc. We're past the last public test release. Put it into factory once 11.0 is done and we'll see how people react and if it works out, we can still put out an line update - in case we have other urgent things to fix (which I have no doubts of :)

Comment 13 Jan Kupec 2008-07-29 10:34:48 UTC

this will be tracked in bug 395480 now

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 395480 ***