On Wed, 22 Apr 2009, [email protected] wrote:
Sorry, the kernel module may have been in there due to problems back when I
created the repository with reposync. However, at an official mirror, there
*are* serious i686 packages. See my response, below.
Yes there are i686 packages in the x86_64 repo, and yes there should be.
I'm not sure I want to do that. The folks here want to use Spacewalk for
possibly provisioning a number of systems at once, and to be able to select
a number of identical ones, and say "uprade", not to have to issue custom
commands for each system. Also, to me, that sort of defeats part of the
point of Spacewalk.
I agree that it should work.
Well,yes, they are. I know what the 686's are. The big thing was this: when
they were in the Spacewalk repository, the query that Spacewalk did on its
d/b got them uniquely. So when I told it to upgrade, it did it with those
packages. Then, when I went to reboot, that failed coming back up, with the
error "request_module: runaway loop modprobe binfmt-464c" repeated three or
so times.
That's a bug in the multiarch handling of spacewalk then.
<snip>
On the other hand, when I click on a package name on the
system->software->upgrade page, expecting the same info that I see
system->software->going
through channels->packages, I get a 500 error.
It's almost like the reported bug against 0.4.
Kindly note that I said I was running 0.4.
Yep, I had noted that... I really wouldn't run against 0.4 out of choice. I
used 0.1/2/3/5. 0.4 was fun for testing.
Multiarch sucks (sometimes), but there really isn't anything >wrong with
our repositories regarding i686 packages (and >there is no i686 kernel in
the 5.2/5.3 repositories). >Luckily the original poster didn't look for
i386 packages <vbeg>.
Wrong. At
<http://mirror.anl.gov/pub/centos/5.2/updates/x86_64/RPMS/>, I find
glibc-2.5-24.el5_2.2.i686.rpm (a real killer)
openssl-0.9.8b-10.el5_2.1.i686.rpm
xen-devel-3.0.3-64.el5_2.1.i686.rpm
xen-libs-3.0.3-64.el5_2.1.i686.rpm
And at <http://mirror.anl.gov/pub/centos/5.3/os/x86_64/CentOS/> is
glibc-2.5-34.i686.rpm
openssl-0.9.8e-7.el5.i686.rpm
So, they really are in the repository, and incorrect.
No, you're not reading what either of us are writing. There's nothing *wrong*
with those i686 packages being in the repo. They're there deliberately. They
should be there. It is not some packaging bug you've spotted.
If spacewalk can't cope with this, and as a result removes and upgrades the
wrong packages, then spacewalk is broken. File a bug.
jh
--
"Ten thousand women marched through the streets of London saying 'We will not
be dictated to!' then went off to become stenographers."
-- G. K. Chesterton
_______________________________________________
Spacewalk-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list
