RPM Support

Is the following statement correct?

If an {S,D,}RPM is absent from a repository, then errata referencing that RPM shall also be absent.

I'm curious, because we have at least three test cases that just broke in exactly this fashion. One of the broken tests is ErratumPkgListCountTestCase. The test does the following:

1. Create an RPM repository with a feed and distributor, and sync the repository.
2. Remove the "gorilla" package from the repository.
3. Publish the repository.
4. Examine the published repository's updateinfo.xml file.

The source repository has four errata, and one of the errata references the "gorilla" package. In the repository published by Pulp, only three errata are present, with the one referencing the "gorilla" package missing.

Is the following statement correct?

If an {S,D,}RPM is absent from a repository, then errata referencing that RPM shall also be absent.

Partially.
If this RPM was the only RPM in the erratum pkglist, then yes, such erratum should be absent from `updateinfo.xml`.
If there are more RPMs in the erratum pkglist, then such erratum should be published, just without those RPMs absent from repo.

OK. I think I understand what you're saying, but I want to make sure that I get it 100%, because this seems to be a significant change from how Pulp has worked in the past. So bear with me.

Let's say I create an RPM repository, add an erratum to it (but no RPMs), and publish it. Will the errata be available via the published repository? My understanding is "no."

Here's a second scenario. Let's say I create an RPM repository, and add:

• an rpm "foo-package",
• an errata "foo-errata" referencing "foo-package"
• an rpm "bar-package", and
• an errata "bar-errata" referencing "bar-package".

When I publish this repository, both errata will be available, correct? And if I remove "bar-package" from the repository and publish the repository again, then both "bar-package" and "bar-errata" will be omitted, correct?

Your understanding is correct in both cases.