Add info about refreshing software repositories

[keichwa]

uyuni-project/uyuni#2645
https://github.com/SUSE/spacewalk/issues/12612

Description

Short summary of why you created this PR

Target branches

Which product version does this PR apply to?

• Manager-4.0
• Manager-4.1
• Manager-4.2
• Uyuni

Links

Fixes #<insert issue or PR link, if any>

[keichwa]

@juliogonzalez or @mcalmer can you please confirm that we actually need a strategic zypper ref here?

[mcalmer]

I would say "no". At least 'zypper patch' should do it automatically and I think 'zypper list-patches' should do it as well.
But a refresh happens only when the cache is declared as outdated. I do not know about the exact time. Maybe 5 Minutes, but could also be 24 hours.
Please ask you zypp guys about the rules.

[juliogonzalez]

All I can tell is that I always manually run zypper ref before running zypper in, zypper up, etc... Just in case.

But could be because I am a long time Debian user, where we need to refresh the metadata :-)

So I agree with @mcalmer, check with zypp guys.

[mlandres]

It depends on how autorefresh is configured for the repos!

• zypper ref checks and refreshes all repositories.
• zypper CMD checks and refreshes autorefresh=1 repositories.

So if you know all enabled repos have autorefresh on, you don't need an explicit refresh. Otherwise you do (unless you know the repos do not contribute to the command).

[mlandres]

I do not know about the exact time. Maybe 5 Minutes, but could also be 24 hours.

The default no-repo-refresh-again timeout is /etc/zypp/zypp.conf:repo.refresh.delay = 10 min.
(Future zypp versions may allow a value per repo).

[keichwa]

Michael Andres <notifications@github.com> writes:

It depends on how autorefresh is configured for the repos!

Thanks for clarification. I think the default is autorefresh enabled. Thus by default we do not need 'zypper ref' here. I'll add a trouble shooting section.

…

-- Karl Eichwalder

[keichwa]

I added a note and consider it ready for review.

[Loquacity]

Just some suggestions to reduce the verbiage.

[keichwa]

Lana Brindley <notifications@github.com> writes:

// We can remove the version info when 4.1 / 2020.07 is released these have been released?

yes, but i want to keep it separate from this PR ;)

…

-- Karl Eichwalder

[keichwa]

@Loquacity, @mcalmer, and @juliogonzalez , and now the question is whether we want to add this note everywhere where we have this or a similar procedure?

[Loquacity]

@Loquacity, @mcalmer, and @juliogonzalez , and now the question is whether we want to add this note everywhere where we have this or a similar procedure?

I think that could easily get out of hand. Let's save it for places where we know it's confusing.

[keichwa]

Lana Brindley <notifications@github.com> writes:

I think that could easily get out of hand. Let's save it for places where we know it's confusing.

Ok, agreed by my side.

…

-- Karl Eichwalder

[mcalmer]

How many places do we have where we describe to call zypper cli directly?
I think this is true for ther server connected to SCC directly. All other systems are managed by the server and that procedure is not needed.

I think when you just find one more place, just duplicate it. If it is more, we might want to check if these descriptions are correct and needed at all.

[keichwa]

I think when you just find one more place, just duplicate it. If it is more, we might want to check if these descriptions are correct and needed at all.

You are right. With grep, I find it just a 2nd time. I guess I'll duplicate it.

[Loquacity]

It was the "or similar procedure" that made me think it would get out of hand 😉