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