[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: is there a bug with packages action based on -release numbers?
From: |
rader |
Subject: |
Re: is there a bug with packages action based on -release numbers? |
Date: |
Mon, 01 Nov 2004 14:07:37 -0600 |
> Is this only happening on RHL 7.3 or can you reproduce it everywhere?
I can't reproduce the problem on RedHat9.
With a bit more testing, the problem seems to be specific to
checking RedHat7.3 for glibc-2.2.5-x!?? Cool, huh. Actual
cut-n-pastes follow my sig.
steve
- - -
systems & network guy
high energy physics
university of wisconsin
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
bash$ cat /etc/redhat-release
Red Hat Linux release 7.3 (Valhalla) UW-HEP 26Oct04.01
bash$ rpm -q glibc
glibc-2.2.5-42
bash$ cat cfe-rpm-test
#!/usr/sbin/cfagent --no-splay --inform --no-lock --file
control:
actionsequence = ( packages shellcommands )
DefaultPkgMgr = ( rpm )
packages:
glibc version=0:2.2.5-44 elsedefine=need_new_glibc
shellcommands:
need_new_glibc::
"/bin/echo need new glibc"
!need_new_glibc::
"/bin/echo glibc is okay"
bash$ ./cfe-rpm-test
cfengine:: Executing script /bin/echo glibc is okay...(timeout=0,uid=-1,gid=-1)
cfengine::/bin/echo glibc: glibc is okay
cfengine:: Finished script /bin/echo glibc is okay
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
bash$ cat /etc/redhat-release
Red Hat Linux release 7.3 (Valhalla) UW-HEP 26Oct04.01
bash$ rpm -q glib2
glib2-2.0.1-2
bash$ cat cfe-rpm-test2
#!/usr/sbin/cfagent --no-splay --inform --no-lock --file
control:
actionsequence = ( packages shellcommands )
DefaultPkgMgr = ( rpm )
packages:
glib2 version=0:2.0.1-3 elsedefine=need_new_glib2
shellcommands:
need_new_glib2::
"/bin/echo need new glib2"
!need_new_glib2::
"/bin/echo glib2 is okay"
bash$ ./cfe-rpm-test2
cfengine:: Executing script /bin/echo need new glib2...(timeout=0,uid=-1,gid=-1)
cfengine::/bin/echo need : need new glib2
cfengine:: Finished script /bin/echo need new glib2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---- Original Message ----
> From: "Phil D'Amore"
> That's sort of weird. I just double-checked the source and
> RPMCheckPackage definitely does consider the release component in its
> comparison. I'm also pretty sure this routine hasn't changed in a
> while. Checking the release also works for me on my FC2 box.
>
> Also, to make sure it hadn't changed I downloaded 2.1.0 (could not get
> 2.1.3 from the FTP site), and check that one and it also works. Doing a
> diff between 2.1.0 and 2.1.10 which is what I currently run, nothing in
> that particular area of package.c has changed.
>
> Is this only happening on RHL 7.3 or can you reproduce it everywhere?
>
> On Sat, 2004-10-23 at 13:17, rader@ginseng.hep.wisc.edu wrote:
> > I trying to...
> >
> > packages:
> > redhat_7_3&some_test_host::
> > glibc version=0:2.2.5-44 elsedefine=do_rh73_glibc
> >
> > but RPMCheckPackage() doesn't seem to notice the difference in
> > -release numbers...
> >
> > RPMCheckPackage(): Requested glibc eq 0:2.2.5-44
> > RPMCheckPackage(): Trying installed version 0:2.2.5-42
> > Comparison result: eq
> >
> > Am I missing something? Has this been fixed since 2.1.3?
> >
> > steve
> > - - -
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Help-cfengine mailing list
> > Help-cfengine@gnu.org
> > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
> --
> Phil D'Amore "Sometimes there is a fine line
> Senior System Administrator between criminally abusive
> Red Hat, Inc behavior and fun."
> Office: 919.754.3700 x44395 -- Ted the Generic Guy
> Pager: 877.383.8795 (Dilbert 4/19/2003)
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: is there a bug with packages action based on -release numbers?,
rader <=