I can only repeat what @hui already tried to explain. Please read from the begin of the thread. openSUSE-repos-* packages are NOT installed on these systems at all (since at least shortly after they were released and forced on my system creating havoc in my repo list).
So there is still no explanation why these four repos were added 2025-12-16 (during my weekly maintenance session) and why then the mtime is set to 2025-12-07 12:47:59. That last action seems also to have happened to @kasi042 who uses the openSUSE-repo service.
When there is an explanation for e.g. the setting of the mtime, one could document that in the Wiki, but until now there isnât.
Well changing mtime is most probably done in a post-update script. What else? The question is which install has this script.
And why âfor a short time, a limited amount of usersâ? Do you run Leap 15.6 and did you check the timestamp of these four repo files (if you have them)?
I checked my backups. I backup every week after update. I keep 10 backups, thus I can go back ~10 weeks.
The unwanted repo files are not in the backup of 2025-12-09.
There are in the backup of 2025-12-16 (remind: directly after update) and are dated 2025-12-07, thus even before the 2025-12-09 backup.
Go figure.
That confirms the libzypp mechanism is the culprit. It used the product metadata to regenerate the managed repo-*.repo files on Dec 16, and the Dec 7 timestamp comes from the metadata itself. Thatâs why multiple systems show identical mtimes.
I have multiple 15.6 installations last updated prior to 2025-12-07. Is there anything I might do on one of those to garner additional evidence? If so, it might require advance adjustments, else it might look like this one:
I never did determine why something kept wanting to create them, hence my use of immutable flags to keep the directory content minimalist for zypp use.
As they say: it is beyond y pay grade.
âproduct metadataâ of what product? I ask, because I probably should file a bug report against something. But at this moment I do not feel that I can produce a consistent story about what happened and should not happen in what package or other component.
I do understand though that the Dec 7 date is only a byproduct of the real problem.
The âproduct metadataâ is the Leap product itself, as your /etc/products.d output shows. Libzypp regenerated the managed repo-*.repo files from this metadata. Whether you think that calls for a bug report is up to you. The maintainers will argue it is part of the intended design.
I cited from the Wiki earlier. In short it says that you install the openSUSE-repos-* packages when you want them managed by it, or you donât when you want to do it yourself.
Isnât that the âintended designâ?
Is it âintended designâ that once a while (after more then a year) it starts littering the repos list when it is clear that you do not want that by not having any openSUSE-repos-* package installed?
And now please read the comment from kasi042 againâŚ
It doesntât matter if you have the openSUSE-repos-* installed or not. The bug is, that 4 repos got added, independently if you have the service packages openSUSE-repos-* installed or not. The only thing for sure is, that the openSUSE-repos-* are not the culprit (besides the permanent bashing from some users regardles of the many advantages).
eg 
