On 2012-05-31 19:51, Velayutham, Prakash wrote:
On May 30, 2012, at 9:24 AM, Prakash Velayutham wrote:
On May 29, 2012, at 3:23 AM, Michael Mraka wrote:
Franky Van Liedekerke wrote:
% On Mon, 28 May 2012 14:13:04 +0000
% "Velayutham, Prakash" <[email protected]> wrote:
%
% > Hi,
% >
% > I just noticed that the update list for one of the clients (I
am sure
% > there are other clients with this issue too) is different when
I
% > check using "yum check-update" on the client compared to what
the
% > Spacewalk server shows. Is this expected?
% >
% > Spacewalk version - 1.6
%
% I noticed it too, even with 1.7: it seems that "yum update" (or
% check-update) also lists packages that will replace other
packages,
% while spacewalk just seems to update to the newest version of
each of
% the installed packages, plus dependancies.
Another reason for this behavior could be use of yum plugins
which modify list of packages - e.g. priorities, protect-packages,
protectbase, versionlock etc.
Spacewalk has no idea what's filtered out locally on the client.
Regards,
--
Michael Mráka
Satellite Engineering, Red Hat
The other question is, after I schedule an update for a client from
the Spacewalk server, when it runs on the client, does it update all
the packages that were selected from the Spacewalk server, or just
what "yum check-update" returns (which might be a subset)?
Thanks,
Prakash
It will just update the packages selected from spacewalk, barring
anything excluded by yum.conf.
Franky
_______________________________________________
Spacewalk-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list
