SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

April 2013

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Stephen Berg (Contractor)" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Stephen Berg (Contractor)
Date:
Thu, 11 Apr 2013 06:35:48 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (30 lines)
On 04/10/2013 11:44 AM, Pat Riehecky wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> I'd suggest a 'yum clean expire-cache' on the systems not recognizing 
> the new packages.  You may have old metadata on them.
>
> I would encourage you to consider mirroring via rsync, rather than 
> reposync.  Rsync will let you preserve hardlinks (and we've got a lot 
> of them) which should translate into less space used on your end.
>
> http://www.scientificlinux.org/download/mirroring/mirror.rsync
>
> Pat
Got an rsync of the 6.4 repo done and set up one system to use it and 
that system still does not see the newer autofs contained in the base os 
repo.  Not sure if there are other packages in this same state, autofs 
is one that we use heavily here so any updates to it are noticed pretty 
quick.  When I saw that it was available in the 6.4 repo and noticed 
that none of my 6.4 systems were getting that update it raised a flag.  
I can still run a "yum localupdate <path to new autofs>" and it works 
just fine.  But there seems to be something wrong with the package or 
the repo keeping it from being seen as an update to the 6.3 version.

-- 
Stephen Berg
Systems Administrator
NRL Code: 7320
Office: 228-688-5738
[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2