Not too concerned about “Backports” but “Main repository outdated”?? Checked in Yast, they both showed “/15.5” . . . . Why would they be “outdated”??
zypper ref && zypper dup -l
Repository 'Update repository of openSUSE Backports' is up to date.
Repository 'Non-OSS Repository' is up to date.
Repository 'Main Repository' is up to date.
Repository 'Update repository with updates from SUSE Linux Enterprise 15' is up
to date.
Repository 'Main Update Repository' is up to date.
Repository 'Update Repository (Non-Oss)' is up to date.
All repositories have been refreshed.
Loading repository data...
Warning: Repository 'Update repository of openSUSE Backports' appears to be outdated. Consider using a different mirror or server.
Warning: Repository 'Main Update Repository' appears to be outdated. Consider using a different mirror or server.
Reading installed packages...
Warning: You are about to do a distribution upgrade with all enabled repositories. Make sure these repositories are compatible before you continue. See 'man zypper' for more information about this command.
Computing distribution upgrade...
Nothing to do.
OK . . . well “outdated” usually means “old” . . . “used up” . . . rather than what might be “predated” . . . meaning “before the dated” . . . “early edition” . . . .
Outdated means there was no actualisation of content for a long time, which makes absolut sense for updates repo for a testing version. This term in connection with a testing version for the next release should be familiar for a tester.
OK . . . “no actualization of content” . . . . But, I’ve been running “alpha” and “beta” systems for many years now, just to have the “cutting edge stuff,” and for the most part there is no apparent “difference” been testing and release . . . particularly in the GUI function–the designated system number, i.e. 15.5, stays the same throughout its lifespan. I’ve got Lubuntu lunar going right now, and there is no “outdated” comments showing up when I run apt . . . . It’s only lately in Leap that I am seeing this data . . . looking in YaSt at the repos as I previously posted it shows “xxxxx/15.5” . . . it doesn’t say “/15.5testing” or whatever.
Obviously it is non-critical to the operation of the system; the other way of looking at it, if there is “nothing to do” about the “outdated” status of the repos, why even have zypper make a comment about it???
Did you ever think about it?
Zypper does a check (no matter if a core, update, whatever repo) of all repos for their actualisation status. If it detects that the content of a repo wasn’t updated for a long time, this could mean that the repo link or mirror is broken (or the mirror owner abandoned it …). That’s why zypper tells the user: hey, have a look there and doublecheck.
But you know the differences between a rpm based distribution and a debian on? No? You also know the differences between apt and zypper?
How would the alpha get tested for appropriate behavior to that errant state were it configured otherwise? Don’t you think the developers have better things to do than create yet another special patch to apply to a pre-release OS version that must be undone at release?
Alrighty . . . “errant state” . . . for which, nothing to be done . . . . Thanks for helping to get my aching head straightened out on this issue . . . . Mea culpa, should have realized there was genius involved . . . .
Already have a TW and a couple of Gecko rolling distros . . . I’m a “multi-booter” . . . jack of all distros, master of none . . . type of guy. It’s all for kicks . . . TW is like a constant “alpha/beta” . . . just no fresh install to have to run–which I do like about it. There are numerous “rolling” distros to choose from . . . . Leap is for the most part the “stable” release version . . . which, after some years messing with rolling, I do appreciate.
The “up” and the “down” of linux is . . . the fiddling . . . .