|
Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing |
| Summary: | YOU should not display patches that install older packages | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [openSUSE] SUSE LINUX 10.0 | Reporter: | Joe Harmon <jharmon> |
| Component: | YaST2 | Assignee: | Klaus Kämpf <kkaempf> |
| Status: | VERIFIED FIXED | QA Contact: | Klaus Kämpf <kkaempf> |
| Severity: | Enhancement | ||
| Priority: | P5 - None | CC: | jochen_r, ma |
| Version: | RC 1 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Other | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Found By: | Other | Services Priority: | |
| Business Priority: | Blocker: | --- | |
| Marketing QA Status: | --- | IT Deployment: | --- |
| Attachments: | screen shot of problem | ||
|
Description
Joe Harmon
2005-09-08 15:26:52 UTC
Created attachment 49230 [details]
screen shot of problem
Thanks for reporting it, but this is not a bug. Online update cannot distinguish between SUSE Linux 10.0 Beta2 and SUSE Linux RC1. Actually it is used to update released products such as SUSE Linux 9.3, SUSE Linux 10.0, SUSE Linux 10.1... That's also why the summary of the update says "For Beta3". I don't understand how this is not a bug. I am installing RC2 on another machine today and it want to downgrade my kernel from the .11 version to the .9 version and it shows it as an upgrade. How is that not a bug? Joe, you should not select these patches then. YOU automatically preselects the right patches. Only select other ones if you are very sure you want them ... YOU has always behaved like this and it was designed to do it this way. I agree this is a usability bug. But it can't be fixed in 10.0 and is certainly not critical. YOU should not display patches that would install older versions of packages when they would not be preselected due to special patch options. Klaus, can you please add this to the feature document? I agree with the reporter. Very confusing, YOU even tries to downgrade some KDE components from KDE 3.5.1 to KDE 3.4.x. You have to check every patch very carfully before you apply it. I consider this as kind of critical since a human can easily mistake on the patch numbering. Fixed in 10.1 |