Peter Slížik wrote: > Hi, > > I believe this list is the right place to report the following yum > bug, which keeps causing wrinkles to the EGEE community. Apologies for > the length, my intention is to provide as many details as possible. > > The problems started approx. on April 6, when people from the jpackage > project changed the digest of their repo's digital signature from SHA > to SHA1. (I think they just updated their createrepo package, because > the "repomd.xml" files on my machines contained the text > "<database_version>9</database_version>" before and > "<database_version>10</database_version>" after the problem was first > reported.) Following the change, SL4-based installations refused to > cooperate, yielding the "[Errno 256] No more mirrors to try" error > message upon "yum update". (SL5-based machines worked fine.) The issue > was discussed on the LCG-ROLLOUT list and the discussion later moved > to jpackage-discuss. People from the jpackage project then decided to > return to the old SHA digest. > > After going back to SHA, a strange thing happened. For users who did > not empty their metadata cache inbetween, the "yum update" command > worked fine. But if they happened to either had run "yum clean all" > (as was suggested by somebody on the list) or if they started with a > fresh SL installation, "yum update" failed with the following error: > > File "__init__.py", line 260, in doSackSetup > File "repos.py", line 287, in populateSack > File "sqlitecache.py", line 96, in getPrimary > File "sqlitecache.py", line 89, in _getbase > File "sqlitecache.py", line 359, in updateSqliteCache > File "sqlitecache.py", line 251, in addPrimary > File "sqlitecache.py", line 197, in insertHash > File "sqlitecache.py", line 449, in values > File "sqlitecache.py", line 441, in __getitem__ > File "mdparser.py", line 73, in __getitem__ > KeyError: 'sourcerpm' > > > Steps to reproduce the problem: > > 1. Create two virtual machines. Install CentOS 4.8 and Scientific > Linux 4.8 on them. > 2. Run "yum update" on both. This is just to reduce the number of > yum's outputs later. > 3. Download the jpackage repository to /etc/yum.repos.d/ > http://grid-deployment.web.cern.ch/grid-deployment/glite/repos/3.1/jpackage.repo > 4. Run "yum update". This will succeed on CentOS 4.8 and fail on SL 4.8. > > > After some investigation, I found a strange thing. Though "yum > --version" reports "2.4.3" on both platforms, the actual > implementations differ. Apart from the obvious configuration stuff > (e.g. cron.d files, /etc/init.d scripts) they differ also in the way > they handle cache. The following files are actually different: > > config.py > depsolve.py > repos.py > > The CentOS implementation has also one additional file: > > storagefactory.py. > > Unfortunatelly, I wasn't able to find the actual cause of the error. > > > If you need to compare the files without installing the whole > distributions, please feel free to download the following archives: > > http://petersbytes.net/tmp/yum-2.4.3-4.el4.centos.noarch.rpm > http://petersbytes.net/tmp/yum-2.4.3-10.SL.noarch.rpm > > There are two possible conclusions: either the CentOS developers > messed with the implementation without increasing the version number, > or the Upstream Vendor issued a new release without increasing the > version number and Scientific Linux did not catch with them. Either > way, I think the problem needs to be patched in SL, because I don't > think that jpackage people will fix the problem on their part - > they're testing their stuff on CentOS and everything works fine for > them. > > Best regards, > > Peter Slizik Hi Peter, Thanks for the information and the detailed analysis. I'm looking into this. I am pretty sure that we did not take any files out of yum 2.4.3. We changed a file or two, but never took any out. I'll look through CentOS's yum rpm and see what the difference is and let you know if a little bit. Thanks Troy -- __________________________________________________ Troy Dawson [log in to unmask] (630)840-6468 Fermilab ComputingDivision/LSCS/CSI/USS Group __________________________________________________