>-- Start of PGP signed section. >>On Fri, 2006-07-07 at 14:10 +0200, Andras Simon wrote: >>> Doing an rpm -Va resulted in a lot of scary messages, >>> S.?..... /usr/bin/passwd >>> being one of the most chilling. (And I thought I was very strictly >>> firewalled, with no unnecessary services running, except for >>> postgresql. Oh well...) >>> >>> Anyway, at the very least, I'd like to reinstall the offending >>> packages. Since there are other packages depending on them, I wonder >>> how this can be done without too much hassle. Would >>> >>> rpm -e --nodeps <package> >>> yum install <package> >>> >>> be safe? >>> >>> Also, I get a lot of >>> >>> prelink: /some/file/or/other : at least one of file's dependencies has >>> changed since prelinking >>> >>> warnings during rpm -Va. Is this something to be worried about? >> >>this is *exactly* the sort of thing I saw the last time my system went >>screwy. >> >>The first thing you have to worry about is filesystem corruption. boot >>from the install cd, and enter the linux rescue mode, and do not mount >>the drives when prompted. >> >>fsck each of your partitions manually, possibly more than once if you >>encounter a drive with many problems. >> >>Once you are able to get through that cleanly, then reboot the system >>normally >> >>identifying the corrupted packages is your next step, again with >> rpm -Va > rpmverify.txt 2>&1 >> >>then step through the packages in question *carefully* >> >>things like glibc you don't want to first remove and then install :-) >> >>use ( yumdownloader <packagename> ) to grab the current package one at a >>time, and use ( rpm -ivh --force packagename*rpm ) to re-install it in >>place. >> >>it may be a wise idea, once you have finished this process, to use >>tune2fs to set up automatic filesystem checks at boot time periodically. >>(I myself set up a 25 remount or 3 weeks option set on mine though >>that's a tad on the paranoid side.. however faced with the above, you >>might think the same way as me -- catch it early. ) >> >>I used >> tune2fs -c 25 -i 3w /dev/sda3 >>to make these settings on my / partition. tune2fs -l will list the >>current settings for you. the manpage for tune2fs is particularly >>enlightening in its description of the -c switch, and I recommend >>reading it. >> >>to catch further filesystem stuff like this, sooner, you might consider >>running rpm -Va once a week in a cron job. > >I'm not yet convinced that things are that bad. Prompted by this thread >I just did an 'rpm -Va' on my RHEL4 system, and got piles of >S.5....T messages (accompanied by sporadic bursts of prelink >activity but no error msgs - is this initiated by rpm if it thinks >there is a problem?). I wrote a little script to 'rpm -V' >package by package and find that: > >1. I seem to have some duplicate package names (this is on an x86_64 > system which has only been 'up2date'ed once immediately after > installation) e.g: > >[root@ls1 ~]$ rpm -q tcp_wrappers >tcp_wrappers-7.6-37.2 >tcp_wrappers-7.6-37.2 > >2. almost all the entries with S.5... have a .T on the end, > and that those entries are in an rpm for which all entries > have a .T This suggests to me that there has been some sort > of package upgrade which is not being taken into account > during the verify. > > >Looks like *something* is wrong, but quite what, I dont know. > > >Cheers, >Terry. To add to my previous msg above, I should have looked a bit longer before posting. It looks like all my 'rpm -Va' problems occur in the pairs of duplicate rpm entries. rpm database mangled? Terry. > >-- >fedora-list mailing list >fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx >To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list > -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
