Craig White wrote: >> The F9 repos were recently (in the past week) updated to use sha256 >> hashes for the repodata. It's possible that this has caused the >> problem, though I am fairly certain that updating from a clean F9 >> install was tested before the new hashes were pushed out. > ---- > I would tend to doubt that. I was pretty much dead in the water with > a system that was setup last August and I updated to updates.newkey > and after that, Fedora 9 might as well have been EOL because I > couldn't update it. I did download and install yum from F10 and it's > updating as I write this but most people are never gonna be able to > do that. That's certainly not good. It's not something I tested or had anything to do with. I only mentioned the possibility that it might be the root of the problem the OP was having as I had seen the change being discussed on IRC a week or so ago. I am fairly sure that the scenario of a clean F9 install and update was tested, but even so, it could easily have missed some ways that things could break. I did a quick bugzilla search and didn't find any bugs on this. Either my bugzilla search was off or there aren't a ton of people running into this. Hopefully it gets reported so that it can be fixed. I can't help but wonder if it requires some unlucky timing to hit? Otherwise I would think the list would have a lot more folks complaining that their Fedora 9 boxes have stopped updating. :/ > This is the type of thing that you can't do mid-release unless you > are absolutely sure it will work. I agree. It definitely seems like a risky change to make at this stage of the Fedora 9 release. -- Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ You can't make something idiot proof, idiots are too damned creative.
Description: PGP signature