Just a quick question about the updates. Will the 'fixes' for the updates
problem be put into an rpm package? And then will that be communicated to
us on this list so we can manually update that package and then start using
the automatic updating? Seems like the reasonable thing to do at this
point.
______________________________________
Brent J. Baude | Information Architect for TCP/IP, Security, & Linux
3605 Hwy 52N
Rochester, MN 55901
(507) 253-0708
T/L 8-553-0708
FAX (507) 253-5192
Renaud Chaillat
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: cc:
cooker-firewall-owner@linux-ma Subject: Re: SV: SV:
[Cooker-firewall] Re: Why are update
ndrake.com questions not being answ
ered?
07/27/2001 09:34 AM
Please respond to
cooker-firewall
On Friday 27 July 2001 16:33, you wrote :
> I have dug a bit and have found out this:
>
> gtk+ seems to be a problem with the downloading. All the other packages
> appear in /var/cache but not gtk+ probably some parseproblem ?
>
> xinet and squid has a dependency problem, they say that they need
> /usr/bin/perl .....
> openssl and tcpdump upgrades OK manually.
>
> NO packages get installed with the updatescripts. gtk+, xinet and squid I
> can understand but openssl and tcpdump should have been installed (I did
> try them separetly)
>
Here's the catch: when something has gone wrong, the downloaded packages
_stay_ in /var/cache so that one can check the problem by hand without
downloading the package again.
When you use the web interface, it downloads the selected packages in
/var/cache, then tries to install _all_ rpms in /var/cache. It then cleans
everything if installation was successful.
So when a package breaks the update, it will stay in /var/cache and will
prevent all next updates until this package is removed by hand, meaning
that the problem was looked at carefully.
We could have removed the problematic packages automatically when something
goes wrong (for instance if another needed package was not downloaded), but
this could mean downloading the package again in some cases.
Also, we could report details about errors, but most of the time you would
need to correct things by hand nonetheless.
The real thing is that there should not be any error: it's our
responsibility
to provide a seamless update. We have to improve that a lot obviously.
Renaud
