On 12/17/05, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Can't you reboot into runlevel 1 and bypass this? Or in rescue mode > off of an fedora installer image? If there is no libpam.so of any > version install then rpm -V pam should most definitely indicate a > problem. > pam-0.99.2.1-1 most certaintly has > /lib/libpam.so.0 > /lib/libpam.so.0.81.1 > in its payload. > > And pam seems to update just fine for me. You'll have to do you best > to figure out why the libpam files didn't install. > > -jef > Yeah in my original mail I said that was the solution (runlevel 1 then update again using pam rpms from yum's cache). What log files should I be looking at to see what caused this? I had a look at a few but didn't see anything really obviously wrong. I don't know if there's a way to roll-back all the updates and try again without a whole lot of work, and I don't even know if the problem would show itself again with certainty. I will have a look at the rpm.spec too because something like this should really be an atomic operation. It shouldn't remove the old libpam.so until it's sure the new libpam.so is properly installed. n0dalus. -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list