Issue #1744
closedDuplicate RPMs in pulp can't be installed
Description
Apologies if this is a duplicate, I looked and couldn't find one.
If an RPM is rebuilt with changed contents without incrementing the version or release number it can't be installed from pulp.
I know the version number or release number should always be incremented, but this is an internal repo for the company and I'm not responsible for building packages.
If you have 2 RPMs in pulp with identical names/version numbers but with different hashes like this:
Arch: x86_64
Buildhost: svhtbxb01.vhols.ads
Checksum: 1c502c8a47a199d8c6b49a03d095f36bdac88ad9ef0cf28fbf1e26fd3a723794
Checksumtype: sha256
Description: This is a simple rpm containing Travelbox.
Epoch: 0
Filename: travelbox-10.21-1.el6.x86_64.rpm
License: Commercial
Name: travelbox
Provides: travelbox = 10.21-1.el6-0, travelbox(x86-64) = 10.21-1.el6-0
Release: 1.el6
Requires: /bin/sh, apache-tomcat, travelbox-client, travelbox-libs,
travelbox-static-files
Vendor: None
Version: 10.21
Arch: x86_64
Buildhost: svhtbxb01.vhols.ads
Checksum: a8d65b7374775a712c66a7817fd2d26eb206e5911fc34796499e64adda74f9b3
Checksumtype: sha256
Description: This is a simple rpm containing Travelbox.
Epoch: 0
Filename: travelbox-10.21-1.el6.x86_64.rpm
License: Commercial
Name: travelbox
Provides: travelbox = 10.21-1.el6-0, travelbox(x86-64) = 10.21-1.el6-0
Release: 1.el6
Requires: /bin/sh, apache-tomcat, travelbox-client, travelbox-libs,
travelbox-static-files
Vendor: None
Version: 10.21
Trying to install it with yum generates this error:
Downloading Packages:
travelbox-10.21-1.el6.x86_64.rpm | 600 MB 01:01
https://svhpulp01.vhols.ads/pulp/repos/vhols-custom/travelbox-10.21-1.el6.x86_64.rpm: [Errno -1] Package does not match intended download. Suggestion: run yum --enablerepo=VHOLS-CUSTOM clean metadata
Trying other mirror.
This is reproducible, and only seems to affect pulp -- ordinary yum repos will overwrite the earlier entry; deleting the RPM and re-syncing fixes the problem.
I couldn't see any fix, but someone else seems to have had the same problem:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/pulp-list/2014-February/msg00005.html
thanks,
Casper.
Related issues