What happened to my list of repositories on December 7?

boven:/var/log/zypp # rpm -qf /etc/products.d
openSUSE-Addon-NonOss-release-15.6-lp156.417.4.1.x86_64
openSUSE-release-15.6-lp156.417.4.1.x86_64

Searching in zypper history:

boven:/var/log/zypp # grep 'openSUSE-release' history | grep 2025
2025-12-16 09:09:05|install|openSUSE-release-ftp|15.6-lp156.417.4.1|x86_64||oss-update|faad6a94d39fc0414a78da09b584a6413f8709a8253abcc0241746e316e65daf|
2025-12-16 09:09:07|install|openSUSE-release|15.6-lp156.417.4.1|x86_64||oss-update|6e01a933f6a3fced75359f045e3dd7f50c72856cd2131dea14ccf62d18e92c36|
boven:/var/log/zypp # grep 'openSUSE-Addon-NonOss' history | grep 2025
2025-12-16 09:09:05|install|openSUSE-Addon-NonOss-release|15.6-lp156.417.4.1|x86_64||oss-update|f96add777a316c7e714771fb68fb92cc3b3e9d3ebcb6b610f9cb7e57c8fecc41|
boven:/var/log/zypp # 

Thus indeed those are installed on Dec 16.

That is consistent with the chain of events you described Henk. When libzypp processed the freshly installed product metadata on Dec 16, it instantiated the product-managed repos, Unfortunately, Ilibzypp doesn’t appear to reconcile by URL, so you ended up with duplicated repos. I think this does warrant a bug report, though it appears to be a corner case as I’ve not seen it reported elsewhere. Maybe there are others who are blissfully unaware.

I am slowly getting hat you mean and what happened.

The update/patch lead to the re-install of those packages. Which then created those four repo definitions without checking if the corresponding openSUSE-repos-* package is installed or not.

I will try to formulate a bug report based on that. Hoping that a correction will result in people like me not having to check their repo list after each update.

It does look like a “one-off” type of event. I’m not sure exactly why you were impacted, and not others running Leap 15.6. Just to clarify, the openSUSE-repos-* packages aren’t involved here; this was triggered solely by the release packages installing the product metadata.

Duplicating repo URLs is not an issue. Until those four repos started appearing, I had no “disabled” repos, only enabled ones. I manage enabling, and most else, manually via filename changes, deleting the last character, or appending a(n) extra character(s), and expect timestamps to be uniform so as to notice when any change is made that I did not make.

Yes, it looks like something that will only take place once in a few years or so.
But I will post a bug report nevertheless. There are always people that are glad to know these hings and use them for improvement.

Maybe because you have to note this by incident. I did see it only because there was a discussion of repos on some other thread and I just looked at mine. One could e.g. also detect this because the extra refresh done will take extra time. Or by using a zypper se and seeing packages mentioned twice.

But to fact that they weren’t there should have signaled that altering the repository list is unwanted on the system.

Why do you believe that? Repos and repo list are not write protected. They can and will be altered by any package. E.g. some external packages like Google Chrome add the Google repo automatically to be able to update the package. Using 1-Click installation will add random repos…and so forth.

1 Like

I see what you mean Henk, but the absence of openSUSE-repos-* isn’t what prevents libzypp from instantiating product-managed repos, and libzypp simply enforces what the metadata declares. In other words, it’s a product-management policy issue, not something the presence or absence of openSUSE-repos-* would control.

The openSUSE-repos-*packages are user-visible, pre-created repo files, not tied to /etc/products.d/*.prod.

1 Like

Depends on your personal preferences.

  • when I put effort in having a repo list (or any other configuration) to my liking, I do not want others to make a mess of it;
  • they take extra time on each refresh, special one of those SLE update repos;
  • on e.g. package search listings they will show packages double, which is confusing;
  • there maybe more arguments to to someone who tries to keep things neat.

All may be personal and you may handle things different to your own joy.

1 Like

Bug report: https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1256123

1 Like

That may all be fine, but at the user (system manager) I can at least signal that something is not OK here.
On one side it is said: you can choose to manage yourself.
On the other side they do: we litter your repo list regardless of what you want.

I hope someone starts thinking about this controversy.

Henk, openSUSE-repos-* is not involved here, and thus should not have been mentioned in the bug report.

It is not involved, but as it being present/absent seems to be the only signal to say: keep your hands off!, it should have been involved.

When not having openSUSE-repos-* does not help, then how to block this? Setting the directory /etc/zypp/repos.d to not-writable by all?

Please read and try to understand…

Why make such a fuss and uprising, when 4 official repos are added by accident by an official openSUSE package. This gets more and more ridiculous. You are wasting your and others time.

The 4 repos do not cause any harm.

Removing the 4 repos is an effort of 5 seconds. Creating a proper bugreport 3 minutes.
Discussing forward and backward since 4 days in the forum…

1 Like

Maybe I expressed myself not precise enough.

I am talking here about the standard/official repos only. Products that add there own repo do not interfere directly with those and I hope they document this thus one can check and eventualy change those to one’s policy.
About the infamous one-click installs I can only say that I may have used them one or two times years (5-10?) ago and if I remember correctly there was an option to add the repo or not. On with I either choose not, or immediate went to disable it (and alter Name and Alias to my liking).

1 Like

That is what we know now. Not when I started this topic.
I am not wasting your time. While I appreciate your contributions because they are always amongst the better ones here, you are free to answer or not and even to read this or not.

See my ideas about this above in another post.

It is not about the removing (I did that already days ago). It is about understanding what is going on on the systems I manage. And as I only detected this by incident, I am really not convinced that it does not touch others.

My VB Leap 15.6 installations where not affected. mrmazda’s installations where not affected…
kasi042’s installation was affected.

But i also use zypper up instead of patch or YOU on my Leap systems.

I doubt. As @kasi042 uses openSUSErepos-*` package he had them already. Only thing that “hit” him was the date/time, which maybe confusing when seen, but who will see it?

If I understand correct, then @mrmazda is using a rather blunt way of blocking altering the repo list. (see somewhere above).

I assume you also use the openSUSE-repos-* package (I conclude this from other posts on the forum where you advertise the pros of them), thus you will also not have new repos added because they are already there. But you could check the mtime of them to see if you got the update.

Henk, please, please, please. Take some steps back, take a deep breath, have a coffee or tea and read the answers that you got from different ppl in this thread again. He got the 4 repos the same like you “on top”. That is why i used that term in one of my answers. He got the 4 unmanaged repo “on top” of the set of managed repos which are provided by the openSUSE-repos-* service package.

To make it even more obvious. When you use the openSUSE-repos-* package, the repo files have following syntax:

/etc/zypp/repos.d/openSUSE:update-sle.repo

The repo files which got provided by the update have following syntax:

/etc/zypp/repos.d/repo-sle-update.repo

And that is why Deano tried to stress this point already several times and tried to explain it to you. These 4 repos got added to some users system independently if you use openSUSE-repos-* or not.