There is a lot of conflicts in this update.
Should I wait for a fix?
Tumble:/home/rektal # zypper dup
Odświeżanie usługi 'NVIDIA'.
Odświeżanie usługi 'openSUSE'.
Wczytywanie danych repozytorium...
Odczytywanie zainstalowanych pakietów...
Ostrzeżenie: Zamierzasz uaktualnić dystrybucję przy użyciu wszystkich dostępnych repozytoriów. Upewnij się najpierw, że te repozytoria są zgodne. Więcej informacji na temat tego polecenia — patrz 'man zypper'.
Analizowanie uaktualnienia dystrybucji...
Problemy z 11:
Problem: 1: problem with the installed Mesa-libva-25.0.3-1699.415.pm.1.x86_64
Problem: 2: problem with the installed libgbm1-25.0.3-1699.415.pm.1.x86_64
Problem: 3: problem with the installed Mesa-25.0.3-1699.415.pm.1.x86_64
Problem: 4: problem with the installed libvulkan_lvp-25.0.3-1699.415.pm.1.x86_64
Problem: 5: problem with the installed Mesa-libEGL1-25.0.3-1699.415.pm.1.x86_64
Problem: 6: problem with the installed Mesa-dri-25.0.3-1699.415.pm.1.x86_64
Problem: 7: problem with the installed Mesa-gallium-25.0.3-1699.415.pm.1.x86_64
Problem: 8: problem with the installed Mesa-libGL1-25.0.3-1699.415.pm.1.x86_64
Problem: 9: problem with the installed Mesa-vulkan-device-select-25.0.3-1699.415.pm.1.x86_64
Problem: 10: problem with the installed libvdpau_virtio_gpu-25.0.3-1699.415.pm.1.x86_64
Problem: 11: problem with the installed libvdpau_nouveau-25.0.3-1699.415.pm.1.x86_64
Problem: 1: problem with the installed Mesa-libva-25.0.3-1699.415.pm.1.x86_64
Rozwiązanie 1: install Mesa-libva-25.0.3-412.1.x86_64 from vendor openSUSE
replacing Mesa-libva-25.0.3-1699.415.pm.1.x86_64 from vendor http://packman.links2linux.de
Rozwiązanie 2: install Mesa-libva-25.0.3-1699.415.pm.1.i586 despite the inferior architecture
Rozwiązanie 3: keep obsolete Mesa-libva-25.0.3-1699.415.pm.1.x86_64
Whatever you are doing, but switching vendor back to openSUSE does not “uninstall a lot (hundreds) of packages” . The vendor switch would be as example “Solution 1” from the terminal output shown in your first post. This has to be done for each conflict (11).
What i have learned so far from my little experience, is that one should wait maybe a day or less before doing zypper dup, for the packages in packman to update aswell. Hope this helps a bit.
Same issue here. Will there be any potential problems in future updates if I choose option 1 to switch all the problem packages’ vendor to openSUSE? or will it offer to switch back to packman once newer packman packages supersede openSUSE’s?
Hi, I have chosen the option to switch to opensuse and it works fine. Note that it is always preferable to use the official repositories of the distribution and packman is not, so the option to switch to opensuse is the best one.
Are you sure with “packman regularly breaks do to no QA and compatibility testing.”?
The packman Mesa package is linked to the repo “openSUSE.org:openSUSE:Factory / Mesa” (Show Extra / A_tw-Mesa - Packman Build Service PMBS).
It is the same source.
The problem is not the “missing QA” or “compatibility testing”. The problem is, that the change in the source repo (“openSUSE.org:openSUSE:Factory / Mesa”) needs to be rebuild in packman (time gap). And the build result has to be synced to the mirrors (another time gap).
Apparently you misunderstand how openQA works.
As soon as a new source (Mesa or whatever) appears in openSUSE:Factory, it gets built and sent to the Packman repo.
It is also built and sent to openQA as part of a snapshot that undergoes testing (including "compatibility testing) and it is not sent to the OSS repo until all tests are cleared. If the snapshot is not published due to failing tests, new packages do not reach the OSS repo, but they are already on the Packman repo, hence possible incompatibilities with other installed packages until a successful snapshot gets published.
The real question is what does not work for you when using the openSUSE Mesa? Many things work OTB in openSUSE these days, just blindly switching doesn’t work as expected these days. Most multimedia works, but the simple way is to consider using flatpaks…
My personal experience: I’ve tried weaning myself off packman periodically, and every time I install Tumbleweed I try to stick it out without for as long as possible. As you said, these days it works out pretty well OOTB, but the most recent time it was HEIF support in the end that pushed me into enabling the packman repo.
The general advice I have often encountered in various places is that you should avoid mixing and matching, you should source everything from packman that it offers to avoid dependency resolution issues. The implication of that advice was that if I wanted e.g. HEIF support, I had to go all in and take Mesa and ffmpeg and VLC everything else too, so I followed it.
To be honest though, as time goes on I am increasingly ignoring that advice and am bit-by-bit switching vendors for packages back to openSUSE as the need arises.
Apparently Mesa was moved from Packman Essentials to Extras. The maintainer said in a reply that “It turned out: the OBS build and the PMBS build are identical when used for linking to Mesa”. Indeed, the spec file for Mesa in PMBS is essentially identical to the one in OBS, so it’s good to me to remove this regular hassle when updating. The only reason why I kept the Packman Essential repo is the unrestricted ffmpeg in it, but maybe that should be less relevant in the future as most online contents are turning to patent free formats like VP9 and AV1.