> -----Original Message----- > From: centos-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On > Behalf Of Akemi Yagi > Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 11:20 > To: CentOS mailing list > Subject: Re: [CentOS] How can rpm "%{SUMMARY}" not be consistent? > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 6:56 AM, John Hodrien <J.H.Hodrien at leeds.ac.uk> > wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Nov 2011, Akemi Yagi wrote: > > > >> What you are seeing is indeed odd. I see 'version 3.1' but not '3.2' > >> anywhere on the Summary line of bash. What is your kernel by the way? I would have said you also seeing 'version 3.1.' is one of the very odd things, but then I check the bash rpm in a repo and it has 'version 3.1.' in the 3.2-32.el5 rpm. > >> uname -mr ? > >> > >> Have you cleared yum cache? Not just running a 'yum clean all' but > >> emptying the /var/cache/yum directory ? > > > > Why would yum cache have any bearing on what rpm reported? > > In my attempts to reproduce what you are seeing, I used 'yum info' a It takes days/weeks of collecting the data via cron.daily and (I think) having a few updates/installs happen between some of the runs. On the boxes where I see it more, I often run the data collection script immediately following updates. I almost think there is some kind of rpm housekeeping that gets done on a daily basis that could affect it, but I can't figure out what it would be, because the rpm script in cron.daily only dumps data (similar to what mine dumps) to /var/log/rpmpkgs... it does not issue any rpm clean up commands. as I understand anacron, each of the scripts should finish before anacron starts the next, so there should not be any DB contention, between the rpm script and mine, I would think. At one time (in the mists of history, probably around RHEL 1|2) I thought there was a daily rpm cleanup task, but I can't find it on Cent 5 systems. > few times for the packages that were not on my systems. But in your > case (pure rpm operations) yum cache will not be relevant. That is my thought too. But I don't know where rpm could be getting the different info. > By the way > I looked at both CentOS 5 and 6 but did not see any inconsistency. I am on CentOS 5. > And > the reason why I asked about the kernel version was because it was not > clear which version/release of CentOS you are running. Sorry for the > noise. I will shut up now. >