SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

June 2011

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:
Troy Dawson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Troy Dawson <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 22 Jun 2011 14:06:07 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (38 lines)
On 06/22/2011 12:57 PM, S.Tindall wrote:
> Troy/Connie:
>
> While updating from SL 5.5 to SL 5.6, yum with gpgcheck enabled
> complained that anaconda was not signed:
>
> # cat /etc/redhat-release
> Scientific Linux SL release 5.6 (Boron)
>
> # yum update anaconda anaconda-runtime
> ...
> Package anaconda-11.1.2.224-2.SL.x86_64.rpm is not signed
>
> I think the 32-bit version and both arch of anaconda-runtime are
> unsigned, too.
>
>
> Steve

I apologize for that.
You were correct, anaconda and anaconda-runtime for both i368 and x86_64 
were not signed.  We double checked and found patch for i386 was also 
not signed.
We have signed the packages, put them in the appropriate places, and 
rebuild the appropriate yum repositories.  Everything should be working 
again.
Please remember that since I just barely did this, you will probrubly 
have to run
   yum clean all
before yum see's the change.
Thank You
Troy Dawson
-- 
__________________________________________________
Troy Dawson  [log in to unmask]  (630)840-6468
Fermilab  ComputingDivision/SCF/FEF/SLSMS Group
__________________________________________________

ATOM RSS1 RSS2