3098 2012-09-12 19:11:46 +0000 zypper(read smart) is not installed in core-image-lsb-sdk 2013-02-26 11:48:17 +0000 1 1 7 Build System, Metadata & Runtime OE-Core core 1.4 All Multiple VERIFIED FIXED Medium normal 1.4 1 mihai.lindner corneliux.stoicescu bluelightning corneliux.stoicescu laurentiu.serban meta.mr.watcher meta.watcher richard.purdie --- --- --- oldest_to_newest 25122 0 mihai.lindner 2012-09-12 19:11:46 +0000 `zypper` is not installed (no longer) in core-image-lsb-sdk images. It needs to be manually included by having "package-management" in image features. I don't actually know if zypper should be included by default or not, but there are tests covering `zypper` for lsb-sdk images. 25170 1 bluelightning 2012-09-13 14:18:10 +0000 I removed zypper deliberately from the LSB package groups since LSB does not require it - it only requires that rpm packages can be installed on the system. Adding package-management to IMAGE_FEATURES is the correct way to bring it in if we really want it for these images, but I would question whether it is necessary to have it or test it for them - particularly if we are already testing zypper in other images. 25175 2 richard.purdie 2012-09-13 14:43:46 +0000 I think we should explicitly add package-management to this image 25187 3 bluelightning 2012-09-13 15:05:02 +0000 Can we justify the addition of zypper when zypper has nothing to do with LSB? 25201 4 sgw 2012-09-13 16:02:57 +0000 I think we are talking at cross purposes here, my guess is that that is some QA test for the -lsb image that tests zypper, which had been part of -lsb in the past. Is this maybe a test plan issue that requires package update testing on the lsb image? It might be more appropriate modify the test plan to test package management on images that contain those tools. 25207 5 richard.purdie 2012-09-13 16:36:29 +0000 We'd be adding "package-management" which might add zypper, it might add opkg and so on. I think having package management in these images does make sense and was always intended. It should not explictly pull in zypper through a packagegroup dependency though. 29190 6 bluelightning 2013-01-25 11:40:59 +0000 So for "zypper" we should now read "smart" here; otherwise the issue and recommended solution are the same. 30109 7 mihai.lindner 2013-02-26 11:19:55 +0000 Assigning to Corneliu, to modify the LSB test plan accordingly, regarding package-management / smart testing. 30110 8 corneliux.stoicescu 2013-02-26 11:47:49 +0000 Removed smart test cases from master and zypper from danny. 30111 9 corneliux.stoicescu 2013-02-26 11:48:17 +0000 Verified as of 2013-02-26