On 2016-02-16 14:41 +0000, Dimitri Yioulos wrote:


-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Hutař [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 12:31 AM
To: Dimitri Yioulos <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]; Wesley Owen <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Spacewalk-list] Client updates failing

On 2016-02-12 15:06 +0000, Dimitri Yioulos wrote:


-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Hutař [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2016 12:41 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Dimitri Yioulos <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Spacewalk-list] Client updates failing

On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 14:22:18 +0000 Dimitri Yioulos <[email protected]> 
wrote:



-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Hutař [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2016 1:31 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Dimitri Yioulos <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Spacewalk-list] Client updates failing

On Mon, 8 Feb 2016 17:38:04 +0000 Dimitri Yioulos
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello, all.
>
> I have version 2.4 installed on a CentOS 6 box.  It was working
> great ... until now.  When I try to run an update, it ultimately
> fails.  The following appears in the client's Spacewalk Events
> History:  Client execution returned
> "Requested packages already installed" (code 0.   I've tried
> dropping the jabber db's, removing osad-auth.conf on the clients,
> etc., all with no joy.  Extensive research has turned up no
> solution.
>
> Can anyone help?
>
> Many thanks.

Hello

Please could you change if you are hitting:

  Bug 1302198 - remote package upgrade saying newer package is
installed, but it is not
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302198

?

> Dimitri
>

Regards,
Jan



--
Jan Hutar     Systems Management QA
[email protected]     Red Hat, Inc.


Hi, Jan.

Sorry, I don't understand what you're asking me to do.  Have I hit a
bug?  A fix in the works?  A work-around?  Because, right now, I have
a non-working Spacewalk.

Dimitri

I'm sorry, I have wrote "Please could you change if you are hitting:" but meant 
"Please could you check if you are hitting:". If I understood you correctly, you have 
issues with updating your clients right? You might be hitting linked bug.

Is your "non-working Spacewalk" a different issue?

Please keep me in CC.

Regards,
Jan



--
Jan Hutar     Systems Management QA
[email protected]     Red Hat, Inc.


Jan,

I appear to be hitting at least a similar bug.  When I run "rhn_check -vv, I 
get a slightly different result:

[root@bofi ~]# /usr/sbin/rhn_check -vv
D: do_call packages.checkNeedUpdate('rhnsd=1',){}
Loaded plugins: fastestmirror, rhnplugin
D: login(forceUpdate=False) invoked
D: readCachedLogin invoked
D: Checking pickled loginInfo, currentTime=1455286056.83,
createTime=1455275977.21, expire-offset=3600.0
D: Pickled loginInfo has expired, created = 1455275977.21, expire = 
1455279577.21.
logging into up2date server
D: rpcServer: Calling XMLRPC up2date.login
D: writeCachedLogin() invoked
D: Wrote pickled loginInfo at 1455286056.85 with expiration of 1455289656.85 
seconds.
successfully retrieved authentication token from up2date server
D: logininfo:{'X-RHN-Server-Id': 1000010098, 'X-RHN-Auth-Server-Time':
'1455286058.04', 'X-RHN-Auth':
'WPcBJp95xQnGWkJegZDD9RnvXc0i4k9eC9d3IxzdCqk=', 'X-RHN-Auth-Channels':
[['centos5-x86_64', '20150219163429', '1', '1'],
['rpmforge-el5-x86_64', '20160211020000', '0', '1'],
['puppet-el5-x86_64', '20160211100000', '0', '1'],
['spacewalk-client-el5-x86_64', '20160211110000', '0', '1'],
['centos5-updates-x86_64', '20160211070000', '0', '1'],
['centos5-base-x86_64', '20160211040000', '0', '1'], ['epel5-x86_64',
'20160211000000', '0', '1']], 'X-RHN-Auth-User-Id': '',
'X-RHN-Auth-Expire-Offset': '3600.0'}
D: rpcServer: Calling XMLRPC up2date.listChannels This system is
receiving updates from RHN Classic or Red Hat Satellite.
Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
* base: cosmos.illinois.edu
* epel: ftp.cse.buffalo.edu
* extras: mirror.lug.udel.edu
* updates: mirror.atlantic.net
Checking for new repos for mirrors
D: local action status: (0, 'rpm database not modified since last update (or 
package list recently updated)', {})                 <-------- NOTE THIS LINE
D: rpcServer: Calling XMLRPC registration.welcome_message

I've noted the line of interest.

From the Spacewalk UI:

Details: This action will be executed after 2/11/16 9:11:00 AM EST
This action's status is: Completed.
The client picked up this action on 2/11/16 9:57 AM The client
completed this action on 2/11/16 9:58 AM
Client execution returned "Requested packages already installed" (code 0)          
 <--------- SAME AS REPORTED IN BUG

Packages Scheduled:
tzdata-2016a-1.el5.x86_64

Of course, a previous version of tzdata is installed on this machine.

Is our Spacewalk database out-of-whack?  I must confess that I run this script 
to clean up obsolete packages: 
https://www.redhat.com/archives/spacewalk-list/2012-August/msg00249.html  Might 
that be the cause?  If so, how do I remediate?

Dimitri

Hello,
I'm not sure if the outputs you have sent matches. According to timestampt in 
`rhn_check -vv` output, it was executed at 09:07:36, but text you have 
copy&pasted from Spacewalk webUI says 9:57.

Cold you please try with osad stopped?:

 1. client# service osad stop
 2. on Spacewalk schedule package upgrade
 3. client# rhn_check -vv

And if output seems reasonable similar to whats in refferenced bug, try with 
change from:

 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302198#c1

 1. client# service osad stop
 2. on Spacewalk schedule package upgrade
 3. client# cp /usr/share/rhn/actions/packages.py{,.ORIG}
 4. client# vim /usr/share/rhn/actions/packages.py   # add these 3
              lines, make sure to preserve indentation
 5. client# rhn_check -vv
 6. client# cp /usr/share/rhn/actions/packages.py{.ORIG,}

Also please provide info about currently installed tzdata package:

 client# rpm -q tzdata --qf "%{NAME}-%{EPOCH}:%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.%{ARCH}\n"

and package you are trying to update to:

 spacewalk# rpm -qp /where/is/tzdata-...rpm --qf
 "%{NAME}-%{EPOCH}:%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.%{ARCH}\n"

Thank you in advance,
Jan



--
Jan Hutar     Systems Management QA
[email protected]     Red Hat, Inc.


Hi, Jan.

This bug is similar, and I posted to it:  
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1248713

Here's the output of rhn_check after stopping the osad client, and scheduling a 
package update in Spacewalk:

[root@server ~]# /sbin/service osad stop
Shutting down osad:                                        [  OK  ]

[root@server ~]# /usr/sbin/rhn_check -vv
D: check_action{'action': "<?xml 
version='1.0'?>\n<methodCall>\n<methodName>packages.update</methodName>\n<params>\n<param>\n<value><array><data>\n<value><array><data>\n<value><string>tzdata</string></value>\n<value><string>2016a</string></value>\n<value><string>1.el5</string></value>\n<value><string></string></value>\n<value><string>x86_64</string></value>\n</data></array></value>\n</data></array></value>\n</param>\n</params>\n</methodCall>\n",
 'version': 2, 'id': 2738}
updateLoginInfo() login info
D: login(forceUpdate=True) invoked
logging into up2date server
D: rpcServer: Calling XMLRPC up2date.login
D: writeCachedLogin() invoked
D: Wrote pickled loginInfo at 1455630131.72 with expiration of 1455633731.72 
seconds.
successfully retrieved authentication token from up2date server
D: logininfo:{'X-RHN-Server-Id': 1000010162, 'X-RHN-Auth-Server-Time': 
'1455630132.38', 'X-RHN-Auth': 'jSQKwscXgB12m2VTlF90h0xFgqQCz0BBNULqmVMYLaE=', 
'X-RHN-Auth-Channels': [['centos5-x86_64', '20150219163429', '1', '1'], 
['centos5-base-x86_64', '20160215172513', '0', '1'], ['centos5-updates-x86_64', 
'20160215181106', '0', '1'], ['epel5-x86_64', '20160215181856', '0', '1'], 
['puppet-el5-x86_64', '20160213002732', '0', '1'], ['rpmforge-el5-x86_64', 
'20160215131156', '0', '1'], ['spacewalk-client-el5-x86_64', '20160215175220', 
'0', '1']], 'X-RHN-Auth-User-Id': '', 'X-RHN-Auth-Expire-Offset': '3600.0'}
D: handle_action{'action': "<?xml 
version='1.0'?>\n<methodCall>\n<methodName>packages.update</methodName>\n<params>\n<param>\n<value><array><data>\n<value><array><data>\n<value><string>tzdata</string></value>\n<value><string>2016a</string></value>\n<value><string>1.el5</string></value>\n<value><string></string></value>\n<value><string>x86_64</string></value>\n</data></array></value>\n</data></array></value>\n</param>\n</params>\n</methodCall>\n",
 'version': 2, 'id': 2738}
D: handle_action actionid = 2738, version = 2
D: do_call packages.update([['tzdata', '2016a', '1.el5', '', 
'x86_64']],){'cache_only': None}
Loaded plugins: fastestmirror, rhnplugin
D: rpcServer: Calling XMLRPC up2date.listChannels
This system is receiving updates from RHN Classic or Red Hat Satellite.
Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
* base: mirror.atlanticmetro.net
* epel: mirrors.rit.edu
* extras: centos.mirror.nac.net
* updates: mirror.trouble-free.net
Reducing Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux 5 - x86_64 to included packages 
only
Finished
Checking for new repos for mirrors
D: Called update[['tzdata', '2016a', '1.el5', '', 'x86_64']]
D: More recent version of package tzdata-0:2016a-1.el5.x86_64 is already 
installed
D: Sending back response(0, 'Requested packages already installed', {})
D: do_call packages.checkNeedUpdate('rhnsd=1',){}
D: local action status: (0, 'rpm database not modified since last update (or 
package list recently updated)', {})
D: rpcServer: Calling XMLRPC registration.welcome_message

And the output from checking on which tzdata package is installed, and which 
I'm trying to update to:

[root@server ~]# rpm -q tzdata --qf 
"%{NAME}-%{EPOCH}:%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.%{ARCH}\n"
tzdata-(none):2015g-1.el5.x86_64

[root@server ~]# rpm -qa|grep tzdata
tzdata-2015g-1.el5

[root@server ~]# rpm -qp 
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/5/updates/i386/RPMS/tzdata-java-2016a-1.el5.i386.rpm --qf 
"%{NAME}-%{EPOCH}:%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.%{ARCH}\n"
tzdata-java-(none):2016a-1.el5.i386

Hello.

I guess this is a typo and you meant:

$ rpm -qp http://mirror.centos.org/centos/5/updates/i386/RPMS/tzdata-2016a-1.el5.i386.rpm 
--qf "%{NAME}-%{EPOCH}:%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.%{ARCH}\n"
tzdata-(none):2016a-1.el5.i386

(BTW: huh, did not knew rpm can handle packages on http://... for
queries as well, thanks)

When I do a manual update via yum on a similar system:

Updated:
 tzdata.x86_64 0:2016a-1.el5

And the output of rpm -qa|grep tzdata is the same.

From you previous post, I'm not sure which three lines you're referring to in:

 4. client# vim /usr/share/rhn/actions/packages.py   # add these 3
              lines, make sure to preserve indentation

Dimitri

Err, you are right, there are 4 lines:

 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302198#c1

(these prefixed with "+" - add them to the location of
/usr/share/rhn/actions/packages.py as you can see there (without that
leading plus sign).

Regards,
Jan



--
Jan Hutar     Systems Management QA
[email protected]     Red Hat, Inc.

_______________________________________________
Spacewalk-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list

Reply via email to