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:
Matthias Schroeder <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Matthias Schroeder <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 22 May 2008 18:36:05 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (35 lines)
Dear All,

I noticed that we get more and more problems with yum updating openafs 
and kernel modules.

I closer look at the logfiles revealed that on afs and kernel updates, 
the installonlyn plugin proposes to remove a kernel version, while the 
kernel-module plugin proposes to update the corresponding 
kernel-module-openafs. And yum happily executes both proposals without 
thinking any further :(

On the next openafs update, yum wants to update said 
kernel-module-openafs, sees that it would also need the required kernel 
for it, adds it to the transaction set - and fails, since it already has 
a newer kernel installed :(

It looks as if the 'installonlyn does not check dependencies' is a known 
fact (see 
https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/yum-devel/2006-February/001946.html 
https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/yum-devel/2006-March/001981.html ).

There is even a fix proposed for that. The patch has to be 'backported' 
to our yum version ("tsInfo.changed" is not yet known?), but 
unfortunately even that does not work too well. The patched version now 
also wants to remove the depending kernel-module-fglrx (good move), but 
still wants to update the depending kernel-module-openafs (instead of 
removing that as well).

Does anybody have an idea how the installonlyn and the kernel-module 
plugins can be made to cooperate better?

Cheers,

Matthias

ATOM RSS1 RSS2