On 04/26/2013 08:49 AM, Stephan Wiesand wrote:
> On Apr 26, 2013, at 15:31 , Pat Riehecky <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> On 04/25/2013 04:52 PM, Joseph Thomas Szep wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We tried to install the lastest kernel update kernel-2.6.32-358.6.1.el6 and due to
>>> an odd chain of dependencies, all openafs packages were removed.
>>>
>>> On our systems, we only keep 2 kernels (as opposed to the default of 3).  So we have
>>> kernels:
>>>
>>> # rpm -q kernel
>>> kernel-2.6.32-279.19.1.el6.x86_64
>>> kernel-2.6.32-358.2.1.el6.x86_64
>>>
>>> and openafs packages:
>>>
>>> openafs.x86_64                                   1.6.2-0.144.sl6                     @sl/6.2
>>> openafs-client.x86_64                            1.6.2-0.144.sl6                     @sl/6.2
>>> openafs-krb5.x86_64                              1.6.2-0.144.sl6                     @sl/6.2
>>> openafs-module-tools.x86_64                      1.6.2-0.144.sl6                     @sl-security/6.2
>>> kmod-openafs.noarch                              1.6.2-4.SL64.el6                    @sl-security/6.2
>>> kmod-openafs-279.x86_64                          1.6.2-0.144.sl6.279                 @sl-security/6.2
>>> kmod-openafs-358.x86_64                          1.6.2-0.144.sl6.358.0.1             @sl-security/6.2
>>>
>>> When the kernel-2.6.32-358.6.1 packages install (due to installonly_limit=2 in our yum.conf), the
>>> "279" kernel is removed and that triggers the removal of kmod-openafs-279.  That seems to trigger
>>> the removal of kmod-openafs and THAT triggers the removal of kmod-openafs-358.
>>>
>>> All this seems to trigger the removal of openafs-client and that leads to local afs-depend
>>> packages to be removed (usrlocalITbin).  The output from a yum upgrade follows:
>>>
>>> # yum update kernel
>>> Loaded plugins: aliases, priorities, product-id, protectbase, refresh-packagekit, subscription-manager
>>> Updating Red Hat repositories.
>>> 1427 packages excluded due to repository priority protections
>>> 0 packages excluded due to repository protections
>>> Setting up Update Process
>>> Resolving Dependencies
>>> --> Running transaction check
>>> ---> Package kernel.x86_64 0:2.6.32-358.6.1.el6 will be installed
>>> --> Processing Dependency: kernel-firmware >= 2.6.32-358.6.1.el6 for package: kernel-2.6.32-358.6.1.el6.x86_64
>>> --> Running transaction check
>>> ---> Package kernel-firmware.noarch 0:2.6.32-358.2.1.el6 will be updated
>>> ---> Package kernel-firmware.noarch 0:2.6.32-358.6.1.el6 will be an update
>>> --> Finished Dependency Resolution
>>> --> Running transaction check
>>> ---> Package kernel.x86_64 0:2.6.32-279.19.1.el6 will be erased
>>> --> Processing Dependency: kernel(do_settimeofday) = 0x5603cf43 for package: kmod-openafs-279-1.6.2-0.144.sl6.279.x86_64
>>> --> Running transaction check
>>> ---> Package kmod-openafs-279.x86_64 0:1.6.2-0.144.sl6.279 will be erased
>>> --> Processing Dependency: kmod-openafs-279 for package: kmod-openafs-1.6.2-4.SL64.el6.noarch
>>> --> Running transaction check
>>> ---> Package kmod-openafs.noarch 0:1.6.2-4.SL64.el6 will be erased
>>> --> Processing Dependency: openafs-kernel >= 1.6 for package: openafs-client-1.6.2-0.144.sl6.x86_64
>>> --> Running transaction check
>>> ---> Package openafs-client.x86_64 0:1.6.2-0.144.sl6 will be erased
>>> --> Processing Dependency: openafs-client >= 1.6 for package: kmod-openafs-358-1.6.2-0.144.sl6.358.0.1.x86_64
>>> --> Processing Dependency: openafs-client for package: usrlocalITbin-6.0-el6.bucs.1.noarch
>>> --> Running transaction check
>>> ---> Package kmod-openafs-358.x86_64 0:1.6.2-0.144.sl6.358.0.1 will be erased
>>> ---> Package usrlocalITbin.noarch 0:6.0-el6.bucs.1 will be erased
>>> --> Finished Dependency Resolution
>>>
>>> Dependencies Resolved
>>>
>>> ====================================================================================================================================
>>>   Package                         Arch                  Version                                Repository                       Size
>>> ====================================================================================================================================
>>> Installing:
>>>   kernel                          x86_64                2.6.32-358.6.1.el6                     sl-security                      26 M
>>> Removing:
>>>   kernel                          x86_64                2.6.32-279.19.1.el6                    @sl-security/6.2                113 M
>>> Updating for dependencies:
>>>   kernel-firmware                 noarch                2.6.32-358.6.1.el6                     sl-security                      11 M
>>> Removing for dependencies:
>>>   kmod-openafs                    noarch                1.6.2-4.SL64.el6                       @sl-security/6.2                0.0
>>>   kmod-openafs-279                x86_64                1.6.2-0.144.sl6.279                    @sl-security/6.2                1.3 M
>>>   kmod-openafs-358                x86_64                1.6.2-0.144.sl6.358.0.1                @sl-security/6.2                1.3 M
>>>   openafs-client                  x86_64                1.6.2-0.144.sl6                        @sl/6.2                         2.4 M
>>>   usrlocalITbin                   noarch                6.0-el6.bucs.1                         @cs/6.1                         391
>>>
>>> Transaction Summary
>>> ====================================================================================================================================
>>> Install       1 Package(s)
>>> Upgrade       1 Package(s)
>>> Remove        6 Package(s)
>>>
>>> Total download size: 37 M
>>> Is this ok [y/N]:
>>>
>>>
>>> People may not see this behavior this time around if they are defaulting to keeping
>>> three kernels installed, but it will sure hit everyone with the next kernel update.
>>>
>>> -Joe Szep
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> That is unexpected behavior, thanks for the report!
> Could we copy the kmod-openafs only depending on the module for the latest kernel over from 6.4 to the other repos?
>
I've placed a version in sl-testing that should resolve the problem.

May I request some testing to be sure it is acceptable?

Pat





-- 
Pat Riehecky

Scientific Linux developer
http://www.scientificlinux.org/