On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Steven Haigh <[email protected]> wrote: > On 8/01/2012 1:44 AM, Ilya A. Otyutskiy wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 6:40 PM, Steven Haigh<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Woah! That is certainly not what I want. I must have screwed up and >>> downloaded the wrong ISO. I've just made sure only the 6x repos are >>> enabled >>> and I'm in the middle of a dist-sync now. >>> >>> Also now I've got to start hunting around and see how many other systems >>> I >>> installed with that ISO! :| >> >> >> But the ISO file name SL-61-x86_64-2011-11-09-Install-DVD.iso looks >> good. It shouldn't point you to the rolling release. And installing >> yum-conf-sl6x shouldn't too. So I'm kinda lost on how you've ended on >> rolling. >> >> Just check your repos on other boxes. It should point to 6.1 or 6x and >> not on rolling. >> > > Sorry, I messed up here... I just checked the fileserver and I have this: > SL-62-x86_64-2011-12-22-Install-DVD.iso > > Whoops. Move along, nothing to see here ;) > > I've just changed everything to point back to 6x and the dist-sync has > completed and the machine is rebooting. I have these IBM servers that take > upwards of 2 minutes to get through the BIOS screens!
Heh. Yeah, the 6rolling is very, very usuful for leading edge component tests, and I use it in testing enviornments, but it represents the phase lag between updates by our favorite upstream vendor, and getting it integrated in Scientific Linux. It's a tricky place to be playing with add-on bits like firmware updaters. Note that problems in 6rolling and the other "rolling" updates are usually resolved pretty fast and integrated into the more stable "6x".
