[Pulp-list] repo published with different checksum-type for group, updateinfo, and productid

[Christina Plummer]

Yes, I saw references to that - if you needed your RHEL5 clients to connect
to a repo that only had SHA-256 checksums.  It isn't required if you use
SHA1 - and I should note that other yum commands that don't rely on the
updateinfo work fine.

I did try installing python-hashlib, but it didn't have any effect on the
updateinfo data being understood correctly by the client (i.e. via yum
list-security or yum info-security).  And I still don't understand why
setting the checksum type equal to "sha" doesn't have any effect on the
checksum used for updateinfo, group, and productid.

Christina

On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Alex Leonhardt <alex.tuxx at gmail.com> wrote:

> You need a package on rhel5/cent5 for this .. I think it's "python-hashlib"
>
> Alex
>
>
> On 09/26/2013 08:56 PM, Christina Plummer wrote:
>
>  Hello,
>
> I discovered that my RHEL5 client wasn't able to utilize the "updateinfo"
> metadata on my repo (for commands like "yum list-security"), but otherwise
> the repo seemed to be working OK.  I took a look at the repodata and
> noticed that these data types had <checksum type="sha256">:
> group
> updateinfo
> productid
>
> And these had <checksum type="sha">:
> filelists
> primary
> other
> filelists_db
> primary_db
> other_db
>
> I hadn't specified the checksum-type when I created the repo, so I tried
> forcing it to sha:
>
> pulp-admin rpm repo update --repo-id=rhel-5-x86_64-os --checksum-type=sha
> pulp-admin rpm repo publish run --repo-id=rhel-5-x86_64-os
>
> But that didn't change the repomd.xml contents (other than the revision
> and timestamps).  I also tried --checksum-type=sha1 and
> --checksum-type=sha256, but nothing seemed to have any effect.
>
> This may be related to this open bug:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=953248
>
> Are either of these (RHEL5 clients not understanding updateinfo.xml data,
> and the group/updateinfo/productid always using sha256) expected or known
> issues?
>
> Thanks,
> Christina
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-list mailing listPulp-list at redhat.comhttps://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-list mailing list
> Pulp-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-list/attachments/20130926/191e9c94/attachment.htm>