On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 21:57 -0800, MHR wrote:
> CORRECTION - please see below....
>
> On Jan 23, 2008 9:54 PM, MHR <mhullrich@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On top of my previously (just now) difficulties with yum, now I find
> that the 53.1.6 kernel is not installing properly.
> >
> > When I run "yum update" to install it, the install hangs here:
> >
> > Dependencies Resolved
> >
> >
> =============================================================================
> > Package Arch Version Repository
> Size
> >
> =============================================================================
> > Installing:
> > kernel x86_64 2.6.18-53.1.6.el5 updates
> 15 M
> >
> > Transaction Summary
> >
> =============================================================================
> > Install 1 Package(s)
> > Update 0 Package(s)
> > Remove 0 Package(s)
> >
> > Total download size: 15 M
> > Is this ok [y/N]: y
> > Downloading Packages:
> > (1/1): kernel-2.6.18-53.1 100% |=========================| 15 MB
> 03:26
> > Running Transaction Test
> > Finished Transaction Test
> > Transaction Test Succeeded
> > Running Transaction
> > Installing: kernel #########################
> [1/1]
> >
> > If I kill this with ^C, it thinks it has installed the kernel, but
> the kernel is not in my grub.conf. Rpm also thinks it is installed.
> >
> > I can remove it with rpm -e, but then rpm -ivh won't install it
> either. It also hangs, at the same point.
> >
> > Here's what I see when I type ^C:
> >
> > error: %post( kernel-2.6.18-53.1.6.el5.x86_64) scriptlet failed,
> signal 2
> >
> > (Yes, I know, signal 2 is SIGINT, which is what ^C does.)
> >
> > BUT rpm thinks it has installed the kernel even though the /boot
> partition has not been updated and the grub.conf file also does not
> show it.
> >
>
> CORRECTION: /boot was updated, just not the grub.conf... .
>
> > Any constructive assistance would be appreciated.
df /boot;df -i boot # ?
Sounds like maybe space is tight? Kernel made it in, but not grub.conf?
Also, on my 5 box, there is no grub/grub.conf, like there is on 4. It's
just menu.lst
Further, I discovered by outside-the-box activities that the update may
be sensitive to the contents of menu.lst. For sure, any changes to the
title lines. I'm keeping eyes wide open to see if the comment lines have
effect - I suspect not.
> >
> > mhr
> >
> <snip sig stuff>
HTH
--
Bill
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
