Thanks Tim, I'm going to do a yum remove on SA and reinstall if required. At the time of the original post I didn't have a spare failover box for SA, that situation is now resolved.
My concern stems from the fact that the original Yum updates done before 3.1.0 was installed didn't mention 3.0.5; that only showed up after. 3.1.0 is handling the requests so the 3.0.5 isn't doing any harm other than to offend my eye. I was hoping someone else had similar experiences and that a simple yum remove would work out OK since the 3.1.0 was installed from source. Ah well - we live and learn. Kind regards Nigel On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 17:28:20 +0000, Tim Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Nigel Frankcom wrote: > >> I installed 3.1.1 today on a fresh CentOS install and foolishly >> neglected to check it hadn't already installed an older version of SA. >> Now when I run yum update it lists 3.0.5 as an update. I've installed >> 3.1.1 from source and am wondering if using yum remove for the 3.0.5 >> install will fubar anything else? > >It may possibly overwrite some files from 3.1.1 depending on where you >installed them, although I'm not sure whether RPM will do a hash sanity >check on the files before removing them. I'm not sure it does for >non-config files. So you might find the yum remove kills your install >and you have to reinstall 3.1.1. > >Much better is to actually install 3.1.1 as an RPM package (build your >own based on the CentOS source RPM if nobody else has done one). >Half-package managing a system (i.e. installing some things from source, >whilst upgrading others with automated tools) rarely ends up as anything >but confusing. e.g. if you want to install something from the OS base >which *is* packaged but depends on SA, it won't work (failed deps) if >you've installed SA from source, etc. > >If you haven't done it before, building your own RPMs is usually fairly >easy especially if you have recent examples (e.g. the 3.0.5 CentOS one) >to work from. > >Tim
