Finally, it sounds like someone else is having the same problem I have been
reporting.  Try this, Brian.  Find a package listed on the 60 to 70 "old
style" list that is NOT in the shorter 15 item "new style" list.  Now, in
the "new style" list, check your "Installed" packages.  I am guessing you
are going to see that package listed as already installed, with the most
current version number, even though it is not actually up-to-date.

I checked this problem again last night with this version of rpmdrake
(1.3-28 - I've been seeing it since at least -21).  This time I saw an even
worse manifestation of it.  It listed the bind package as being out of date.
But I thought I'd hit the "Update Source" button first and make sure the
list was indeed up-to-date (or is that not what the Update Source button is
for?).  When it was done updating, it had removed bind from the list of
packages that needed updating, and changed the installed version number to
the latest version.  But it hadn't updated the package, and a check from the
command line with rpm -q confirmed that the old version was still installed.

Eaon

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Brian J. Murrell
> Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 5:01 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake-1.3-28mdk.i586.rpm is segfaulting all
> over the place
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 01:11:36PM +0200, David Odin wrote:
> >
> >   Do you have a _reproductible_ way of making rpmdrake segfaulting?
>
> Start up MandrakeUpdate, add a "Cooker" medium, choose the
> ftp.grolier.fr mirror then choose Update Medium.  Boom.  Segfault.
>
> If I restart MandrakeUpdate it goes further than I have gotten it to
> before.
>
> It's still falling way short of the mark however.  In MandrakeUpdate
> (Cooker->Updates Only) mode it shows only a small fraction of the
> packages that an "old style" MandrakeUpdate lists available
> for update.  My "old style" MandrakeUpdate shows 60 or 70 packages
> that have updates rpmdrake shows about 15.
>
> b.
>
>
> --
> Brian J. Murrell
>


Reply via email to