yum -> rpmdb: Locker still has locks
Paul Dickson
paul at permanentmail.com
Tue Nov 14 09:04:01 UTC 2006
On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 18:15:39 -0500, Jim Cornette wrote:
> Paul Dickson wrote:
>
> >> I misinterpreted the 3/70 and the [...] above. So did it continued through
> >> to 70/70 after rebuilding the db before the transaction?
> >
> > Yes it did finish. I merely included a clipping to show that glibc was
> > no longer installed, at least according to yum/rpm.
> >
> > -Paul
> >
>
> Do you have the entry currently inserted into the rpm database for
> glibc? If it is now in the rpm database, does glibc check out as being
> intact?
> At least it was not removed in actuality.
"rpm -V glibc glic-common" doesn't report any problems.
Yesterday, yum installed bin-utils because of dependencies. I now wish
I'd done a rpm -V before I pressed Y, but more than likely, it just
wasn't in the rpm DB any more.
-Paul
More information about the fedora-test-list
mailing list