during recent update, yumex returned error;
Error checking package signatures:
Package jdk-1.6.0_31-fcs.i586.rpm is not signed
update completed via yum --nogpgcheck update.
--
peace out.
tc.hago,
g
.
*please reply plain text only. html text are deleted*
in a free world without
Hi g!
On 2012.03.01 at 10:34:41 +, g wrote next:
during recent update, yumex returned error;
Error checking package signatures:
Package jdk-1.6.0_31-fcs.i586.rpm is not signed
update completed via yum --nogpgcheck update.
This package isn't part of SL system. If you have installed
On 03/01/2012 04:34 AM, g wrote:
during recent update, yumex returned error;
Error checking package signatures:
Package jdk-1.6.0_31-fcs.i586.rpm is not signed
update completed via yum --nogpgcheck update.
We are unable to sign the jdk packages, and have not done so
historically. The
On 03/01/2012 02:31 PM, Vladimir Mosgalin wrote:
Hi g!
On 2012.03.01 at 10:34:41 +, g wrote next:
during recent update, yumex returned error;
Error checking package signatures:
Package jdk-1.6.0_31-fcs.i586.rpm is not signed
update completed via yum --nogpgcheck update.
This
On 03/01/2012 03:12 PM, Pat Riehecky wrote:
On 03/01/2012 04:34 AM, g wrote:
during recent update, yumex returned error;
Error checking package signatures:
Package jdk-1.6.0_31-fcs.i586.rpm is not signed
update completed via yum --nogpgcheck update.
We are unable to sign the jdk
Hi g!
On 2012.03.01 at 18:08:26 +, g wrote next:
Unless you have some specific requirements, generally you can use
SL-supplied java-1.6.0-openjdk and java-1.6.0-openjdk-devel packages
instead of package above, then you won't have this kind of problem. But
if you are sure you
hello v.
On 03/01/2012 07:45 PM, Vladimir Mosgalin wrote:
Yes, sorry for providing wrong information.
-=-
i will take blame on this one.
actually, i errored first. i did not state release and list packages
in my first post. so, my bad.
i did have info in a text file from when update
