Re: is there a bug with packages action based on -release numbers?

[rader]

 > Is this only happening on RHL 7.3 or can you reproduce it everywhere?

I can't reproduce the problem on RedHat9.  

With a bit more testing, the problem seems to be specific to
checking RedHat7.3 for glibc-2.2.5-x!??  Cool, huh.  Actual 
cut-n-pastes follow my sig.

steve 
- - - 
systems & network guy
high energy physics
university of wisconsin

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

bash$ cat /etc/redhat-release
Red Hat Linux release 7.3 (Valhalla) UW-HEP 26Oct04.01

bash$ rpm -q glibc
glibc-2.2.5-42

bash$ cat cfe-rpm-test 
#!/usr/sbin/cfagent --no-splay --inform --no-lock --file
control:
  actionsequence = ( packages shellcommands )
  DefaultPkgMgr = ( rpm )
packages:
  glibc version=0:2.2.5-44 elsedefine=need_new_glibc
shellcommands:
  need_new_glibc::
    "/bin/echo need new glibc"
  !need_new_glibc::
    "/bin/echo glibc is okay"

bash$ ./cfe-rpm-test 
cfengine:: Executing script /bin/echo glibc is okay...(timeout=0,uid=-1,gid=-1)
cfengine::/bin/echo glibc: glibc is okay
cfengine:: Finished script /bin/echo glibc is okay

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

bash$ cat /etc/redhat-release
Red Hat Linux release 7.3 (Valhalla) UW-HEP 26Oct04.01

bash$ rpm -q glib2
glib2-2.0.1-2

bash$ cat cfe-rpm-test2
#!/usr/sbin/cfagent --no-splay --inform --no-lock --file
control:
  actionsequence = ( packages shellcommands )
  DefaultPkgMgr = ( rpm )
packages:
  glib2 version=0:2.0.1-3 elsedefine=need_new_glib2
shellcommands:
  need_new_glib2::
    "/bin/echo need new glib2"
  !need_new_glib2::
    "/bin/echo glib2 is okay"

bash$ ./cfe-rpm-test2
cfengine:: Executing script /bin/echo need new glib2...(timeout=0,uid=-1,gid=-1)
cfengine::/bin/echo need : need new glib2
cfengine:: Finished script /bin/echo need new glib2

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 > ---- Original Message ----
 > From: "Phil D'Amore"
 > That's sort of weird.  I just double-checked the source and
 > RPMCheckPackage definitely does consider the release component in its
 > comparison.  I'm also pretty sure this routine hasn't changed in a
 > while.  Checking the release also works for me on my FC2 box.
 > 
 > Also, to make sure it hadn't changed I downloaded 2.1.0 (could not get
 > 2.1.3 from the FTP site), and check that one and it also works.  Doing a
 > diff between 2.1.0 and 2.1.10 which is what I currently run, nothing in
 > that particular area of package.c has changed.
 > 
 > Is this only happening on RHL 7.3 or can you reproduce it everywhere?
 > 
 > On Sat, 2004-10-23 at 13:17, rader@ginseng.hep.wisc.edu wrote:
 > > I trying to...
 > > 
 > >  packages:
 > >    redhat_7_3&some_test_host::
 > >      glibc version=0:2.2.5-44 elsedefine=do_rh73_glibc
 > > 
 > > but RPMCheckPackage() doesn't seem to notice the difference in
 > > -release numbers...
 > > 
 > >  RPMCheckPackage(): Requested glibc eq 0:2.2.5-44
 > >  RPMCheckPackage(): Trying installed version 0:2.2.5-42
 > >  Comparison result: eq
 > > 
 > > Am I missing something?  Has this been fixed since 2.1.3?
 > > 
 > > steve
 > > - - - 
 > > 
 > > 
 > > _______________________________________________
 > > Help-cfengine mailing list
 > > Help-cfengine@gnu.org
 > > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
 > -- 
 > Phil D'Amore                             "Sometimes there is a fine line
 > Senior System Administrator               between criminally abusive
 > Red Hat, Inc                              behavior and fun."
 > Office: 919.754.3700 x44395                 -- Ted the Generic Guy
 > Pager: 877.383.8795                            (Dilbert 4/19/2003)