Here is the output for the manual compare and the rhn_check --vv run with the additional output included. https://paste.fedoraproject.org/315076/
Here is the output for the rpm queries. https://paste.fedoraproject.org/315080/ Regards, --Tony -----Original Message----- From: Jan Hutař [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 4:10 PM To: Coffman, Anthony J <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Spacewalk-list] Possible BUG: Requested packages have already been installed on CentOS 5 clients Thank you. So far i have found something strange, but looks like only you are hitting the issue. Could you please try this (on the client which is failing to install the packages): # python Python 2.4.3 (#1, Oct 23 2012, 22:02:41) [GCC 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-54)] on linux2 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> import yum.packages >>> current = yum.packages.PackageEVR(None, '0.9.8e', '36.0.1.el5_11') >>> new = yum.packages.PackageEVR(None, '0.9.8e', '37.el5_11') >>> current.compare(new) -1 >>> new = yum.packages.PackageEVR('', '0.9.8e', '37.el5_11') >>> current.compare(new) 1 This is output I got on system with: # rpm -q yum-rhn-plugin rpm rpm-python yum yum-rhn-plugin-0.5.4.1-7.el5 rpm-4.4.2.3-36.el5_11 rpm-python-4.4.2.3-36.el5_11 yum-3.2.22-40.el5 (I know you have different yum-rhn-plugin version, but maybe that is not important in this case) After that, please add these 4 lines which will provide more output to the /usr/share/rhn/actions/packages.py file after row 346: --- usr/share/rhn/actions/packages.py.ORIG 2016-01-26 22:01:10.002192351 +0100 +++ usr/share/rhn/actions/packages.py 2016-01-26 22:04:56.623616475 +0100 @@ -344,6 +344,10 @@ found = False for pkg in pkgs: + current = pkg.returnEVR() + print "Current:", current.epoch, current.version, current.release + print "Candidate:", evr.epoch, evr.version, evr.release + print "Comparasion:", current.compare(evr) if pkg.returnEVR().compare(evr) == 0: log.log_debug('Package %s already installed' \ % _yum_package_tup(package)) and regenerate `rhn_check -vv` output. Note I have not tried this, so I'm not 100% sure it will work, so backup the file first please. And one more thing to be sure packages are OK: rpm -qp --qf="%{EPOCH}:%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.%{ARCH}" openssl-0.9.8e-37.el5_11.i686.rpm rpm -qp --qf="%{EPOCH}:%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.%{ARCH}" openssl-0.9.8e-36.0.1.el5_11.i686.rpm or if you have them installed: rpm -q --qf="%{EPOCH}:%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.%{ARCH}" openssl-0.9.8e-37.el5_11.i686 rpm -q --qf="%{EPOCH}:%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.%{ARCH}" openssl-0.9.8e-36.0.1.el5_11.i686 Regards, Jan On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 17:18:44 +0000 "Coffman, Anthony J" <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for having a look. > > I should have also mentioned that a yum install or yum update does > successfully install the same package(s) (from the same Spacewalk > repos) > > Here's the rhn -vv output during an attempted update of openssl. > > https://paste.fedoraproject.org/314962/ > > Here't the package list (rpm -qa | sort) > > https://paste.fedoraproject.org/314963/ > > It does this if I try to update any package or groups of packages via > scheduled action. > > Regards, > --Tony > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Hutař [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 2:47 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: Coffman, Anthony J <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Spacewalk-list] Possible BUG: Requested packages have > already been installed on CentOS 5 clients > > On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:14:54 +0000 "Coffman, Anthony J" > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I ran into this one yesterday unexpectedly. > > > > It seems there may be a bug in the SW 2.4 client that seems to only > > affect EL5 clients. I tested this on CentOS 5 i386 but not on > > x86_64 yet. I haven't seen it on EL6, EL7, or SuSE. > > > > When you scheduled a package install/update action, you get this > > back > > > > Client execution returned "Requested packages already installed" > > (code > > 0) > > > > The 0 return code makes it look successful but no package > > changes are made. Because of the change to spread out > > errata cache processing over time you can easily be fooled into > > thinking that you have successfully applied updates when in reality > > nothing was actually applied. > > > > The requested packages are not actually already installed. > > > > I rolled one test system back to the 2.3 client manually and it does > > fix the issue. > > > > Has anybody else run into this problem? > > > > --Tony > > As a first step, could you please run rhn_check on the client with > "-vv" option and sent the full output? Also `rpm -qa | sort` might be > handy. > > Regards, > Jan > > > > -- > Jan Hutar Systems Management QA > [email protected] Red Hat, Inc. -- Jan Hutar Systems Management QA [email protected] Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ Spacewalk-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list
