Lauro, John wrote:
I have had trouble getting yum to work on a box that was fairly behind on it's updates. As a work around I ended up downloading several yum packages by hand, rpm -e the old ones and rpm -i the new ones.
I still don't see how they could have different checksums if they are hard linked.
agreed ... so their must be something wrong with the hardlink.py program ...
i say this because, we only made ONE file (they were noarch files) ... they were copied to one place and hard linked into the other place.
then automated -avzH rsyncs were used to copy to other places
then hardlink.py was run against the repos ... and the x86_64 noarch files changed, but the i386 ones stayed the same.
i do not know how ... just that it did happen
-----Original Message----- From: centos-mirror-bounces@centos.org
[mailto:centos-mirror-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of H. Peter
Anvin Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 7:28 PM To: Mailing list for CentOS mirrors. Subject: Re: [CentOS-mirror] Yum 3.2.8-9 from msync-dvd.centos.org
wrong?
Lauro, John wrote:
2 files linked together and 2 other files linked together instead
of 4
files linked together?
Then they're not hard-linked together, though.
FWIW, we have gotten these bug reports from our users, too.