SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

May 2008

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:
Andreas Petzold <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Andreas Petzold <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 20 May 2008 12:37:22 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (43 lines)
	Hi,

on SL4.4 x86_64 I've been trying to figure out why some of my machines 
correctly pull in the new kernel-module-openafs-<new kernel version> when the 
kernel is upgraded to a new version and some other machines don't do it 
correctly.

I looked at the python source of the kernel-modules yum plugin which comes 
with the yum rpm. The plugin is using the 'provides' part of the rpm header 
of all installed kernel-module-XXXX type packages to determine if a new 
version of the rpm is available and needs to be installed.

So I checked a few packages:

$ rpm -q --provides kernel-module-openafs-2.6.9-42.0.2.ELsmp
kernel-module-openafs = 0:1.4.1-0.11.SL
openafs-kernel
kernel-module-openafs-2.6.9-42.0.2.ELsmp = 0:1.4.1-0.11.SL

$ rpm -q --provides kernel-module-openafs-2.6.9-67.0.4.ELsmp
openafs-kernel
kernel-module-openafs-2.6.9-67.0.4.ELsmp = 0:1.4.4-46.SL4

And now I do understand what's going wrong. The kernel-module plugin requires 
the line "kernel-module-openafs" to be present from which it constructs the 
new package name kernel-module-openafs-<new kernel>. However this line in 
the 'provides' part of the rpm header is not present in the more recent rpms. 
On some of my machines I've cleaned up very old versions of the 
kernel-module-openafs packages as they are not automatically removed even 
when the corresponding kernel is removed and on these machines the update 
doesn't work correctly. On the machines that still have the old packages the 
update works fine.

I haven't checked if this problem also occurs with other kernel module 
packages.

So my question is, is this a bug in the packaging of the kernel-module-XXX 
type packages or is this a bug in the kernel-modules yum plugin?

	Cheers,

		Andreas

ATOM RSS1 RSS2