Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:34:14 -0500 |
Content-Type: | TEXT/PLAIN |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Todd,
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Todd Blake wrote:
> Should I be using yum or up2date to update my SL 4.0 systems? I saw that errata
> were no available for SL 4.0 and issued a "yum update" and it tells me nothing
> is in need of updating, but "up2date -l" tells me of three packages we have
> installed that need it. Any ideas/tips/hints? I pasted below the output from
> "up2date -l" and "yum update".
The SL.releasenote specifically says to NOT use up2date but to use yum.
>
> root@radon# yum update
> Setting up Update Process
> Setting up Repos
> sl-base 100% |=========================| 1.1 kB 00:00
> sl-errata 100% |=========================| 951 B 00:00
> Reading repository metadata in from local files
> sl-base : ################################################## 1447/1447
> No Packages marked for Update/Obsoletion
>
will research. Note that there issues with the "server" last night which
may be related to this issue.
>
> root@radon# up2date -l
>
> Fetching Obsoletes list for channel: scientific-base...
>
> Fetching Obsoletes list for channel: scientific-errata...
>
> Fetching rpm headers...
> ########################################
>
> Name Version Rel
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> cvs 1.11.17 7.RHEL4 i386
> devhelp 0.9.2 2.4.4 i386
> mozilla-nspr 1.7.7 1.4.2 i
>
We only made this to work for the case were up2date got turned on by
default to handle the "automatic" update. We did not want it trying to
contact redhat.
-Connie Sieh
|
|
|