Markus Neteler wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 11:16, Markus Neteler <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have updated from the previous to the current 5.x SL version following
>> this procedure
>>
>> https://www.scientificlinux.org/documentation/howto/upgrade.5x
>> -> "For those a little more cautious"
> 
> I have made another test, and found (at least) 650 packages not being updated:
> 
> rpm -qa --queryformat '%{NAME} was installed on %{INSTALLTIME:date}\n'
> | grep ' 2008 ' | wc -l
> 650
> 
> rpm -qa --queryformat '%{NAME} was installed on %{INSTALLTIME:date}\n'
> | grep ' 2008 ' | head -2
> sed was installed on Fri 22 Aug 2008 04:04:50 PM CEST
> libXfont was installed on Fri 22 Aug 2008 04:04:51 PM CEST
> 
> In Summer 2008 we installed the machine... how to enforce the full upgrade to
> SL5.5?
> 
> I also tried to update again:
> 
> yum update
> Loaded plugins: kernel-module
> http://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/55/x86_64/SL/repodata/repomd.xml:
> [Errno 12] Timeout: <urlopen error timed out>
> Trying other mirror.
> sl-base
>                 | 2.1 kB     00:00
> sl-base/primary_db
>                 | 2.0 MB     00:02
> http://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/55/x86_64/updates/security/repodata/repomd.xml:
> [Errno 12] Timeout: <urlopen error timed out>
> Trying other mirror.
> sl-security
>                 | 1.9 kB     00:00
> sl-security/primary_db
>                 | 309 kB     00:00
> Setting up Update Process
> No Packages marked for Update
> 
> 
> thanks
> Markus

Hi Markus,
I'm a little concerned about the URL timeout.  I'll look into that.

As for the update not updating every single package, I think you are a 
little confused about the differences between minor releases.  When you 
go between minor releases (5.4-> 5.5) what you are getting is all the 
security and bugfixes that came out when the newer minor release came out.
So if a package didn't have a bugfix or a security update, then that 
package does not get updated.
There are plenty of packages that do not get any bugfix's our security 
updates.  We even have a couple of rpm's that haven't changed between 
major releases (SL_rpm_show_arch, SL_password_for_singleuser ... etc)

In short, looking at the install date to see if a package needs to be 
updated, isn't the correct way.

Troy
-- 
__________________________________________________
Troy Dawson  [log in to unmask]  (630)840-6468
Fermilab  ComputingDivision/LSCS/CSI/USS Group
__________________________________________________