On Fri, 6 Jan 2012, Pat Riehecky wrote:

> A new version of nfs-utils (nfs-utils-1.2.3-15.el6.0.sl6) has been posted in 
> the Scientific Linux testing repository.  The only difference between it and 
> the existing one is an incremented version number.  If testing verifies it 
> works as expected it may be placed in the security tree.
>
> This changed version reflects a fork in the naming from upstream which we 
> attempt to avoid as much as possible.

Thanks for making the naming change in this instance.

> On 12/27/2011 06:36 AM, Dr Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
>> On Thu, 22 Dec 2011, Pat Riehecky wrote:
>> 
>>> This email announces a reissue of the nfs-utils package due to a bug in 
>>> the build environment.  Users experiencing issues with umount.nfs can 
>>> correct the error by downgrading nfs-utils to the previous version (yum 
>>> downgrade nfs-utils), cleaning their repodata (yum clean all), and 
>>> updating nfs-utils again (yum update nfs-utils).  All Scientific Linux 
>>> mirrors will acquire this update at their next sync.
>> 
>> If
>> rpmquery  -i nfs-utils  | grep "Build Date"
>> returns
>> Release     : 15.el6            Build Date: Wed 14 Dec 2011 15:17:13 GMT
>> do I have the new/good version or the old one ?
>> 
>> If that doesn't distinguish the bad package and you can't
>> push a rebuild with a different release number (I'd have thought
>> that in this case replacing el6 with sl6... would have been justified)
>> can you give us another way of distinguishing the two versions
>> rather than just telling us to downgrade and reupgrade.

-- 
Dr. Andrew C. Aitchison		Computer Officer, DPMMS, Cambridge
[log in to unmask]	http://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~werdna