On Mon, 2002-06-03 at 19:35, Baca, Ricky wrote: > >Guessing without the complete traceback -- your comps file probably > >references a package which doesn't exist in your header list since > >you've cut things down to one disc. > > Here is the beauty of the whole process...I have used various tools to check > my comps file and to check the RPMs directory for dependency issues and > anything else I could...to no avail...I started following a suggestion to > trim down my comps file to just a couple of packages in Base and then list > all the packages I need in the kickstart file, but a simple version of that > didn't seem to change....I guess I will continue to try all kinds of various > techniques until I get fired or relieved....whichever one comes first... > > Thanks for your help...any more will be appreciated! ok its not terribly pretty but it seems to work: go here: http://www.dulug.duke.edu/treetools/ you'll find a file called comps-check.pl - it works for MOST situations. You pass it an architecture a comps file and a dir of rpms - it hands you back whats in the comps file thats missing from the dir of rpms for that arch. I'm planning on rewriting it in python (or rather liberally stealing code from anaconda :) the other two scripts are programs that I and jack neely put together to help maintain distribution trees - the add-rpm.py adds updated rpms to an install tree. depchecktree.py just takes the dirs you give it, look for all the rpms and tell you if they fully satisfy their depedencies. YMMV, HTH, HAND. -sv
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
