This is a pretty busy server which has been long overdue on FC4.
The boot-DVD was thoroughly checked out and worked OK, finding and
offering to upgrade the FC4 with mounts correctly found too. It got
through "Finding packages to upgrade" fairly fast then plodded through
"Finding dependencies" at about 1% per second up to 30% where it stopped
dead for over an hour (twice) so I had to give up. The second attempt
was with non-X anaconda - exactly the same symptoms. There was no clue
on the logging screen (Alt-F3) but when I ran top in Alt-F2,(sadly only
the Busybox version) anaconda was running variably. I'm rather proud of
the dump below, OCR'ed from my camera shot of the monitor because
although I'd booted off a USB-DVD (only CD built-in) I couldn't get a
USB pen mounted.

This is probably something specific to this server (it has a RAID driver
issue) but I wonder if anyone here has seen similar?
Should I wait for (many) more hours?

Mem 440440K used 1634680K free, 0K shrd, 12976K buff, 151792K cached
Load average 1.36 1.25 1.95
PID USER STATUS USZ PPID %CPU %MEM COMMAND
981 0 RW 223M 473 24.8 18.9 anaconda
981 0 RW 2856 753 0.0 0.1 top
982 0 SW 36396 981 0.0 1.7 anaconda
979 0 SW 26284 1 0.0 1.2 anaconda
974 0 SW 26276 1 0.0 1.2 anaconda
966 0 SW 26272 1 0.0 1.2 anaconda
988 0 SW 3764 473 0.0 0.1 hotplug
473 0 SW 3756 1 0.0 0.1 loader
753 0 SW 2624 473 0.0 0.1 sh
1 0 SW 732 0 0.0 0.0 init
172 0 SW 732 1 0.0 0.0 init
735 0 SW< 0 2 0.0 0.0 usb~storage
250 0 SW< 0 2 0.0 0.0 kswapd0
13 0 SW< 0 2 0.0 0.0 ksoftirqd/3
7 0 SW< 0 2 0.0 0.0 ksoftirqd/1




--
Have fun,
Mike Yates
--
Frome Somerset England

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Mike Yates writes:


This is probably something specific to this server (it has a RAID driver
issue) but I wonder if anyone here has seen similar?
Should I wait for (many) more hours?


This is a known issue.

You need to compile a list of rpms you have that originate from non-Fedora
yum repositories, and nuke them.


You can reinstall them after the upgrade, and after you've updated the core
Fedora 8 install with all the current updates.


--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Sam Varshavchik wrote:


This is a known issue.

You need to compile a list of rpms you have that originate from
non-Fedora yum repositories, and nuke them.


You can reinstall them after the upgrade, and after you've updated the
core Fedora 8 install with all the current updates.




OK, but what an issue!
Does it apply to FC7 too?

That looks ridiculously laborious.
Maybe easier to build a new system off-line and switch over to it.

# rpm -qa | wc -l
1672
# rpm -qa | grep fc4 | wc -l
259

Is there a tool to search the repositories for all those 1,413 which are
not obviously FC4 ?

--
Have fun,
Mike Yates
--
Frome Somerset England



--
Have fun,
Mike Yates
--
Frome Somerset England

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Correction:-
# rpm -qa | grep -i fc4 | wc -l
459

So there's another 200 (FC4 not fc4) we can discount.
Still leaves 1,213 !

I wrote:


# rpm -qa | wc -l
1672
# rpm -qa | grep fc4 | wc -l
259

Is there a tool to search the repositories for all those 1,413 which are
not obviously FC4 ?




--
Have fun,
Mike Yates
--
Frome Somerset England

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Mike Yates wrote:

Sam Varshavchik wrote:


This is a known issue.

You need to compile a list of rpms you have that originate from
non-Fedora yum repositories, and nuke them.


You can reinstall them after the upgrade, and after you've updated the
core Fedora 8 install with all the current updates.




OK, but what an issue!
Does it apply to FC7 too?

That looks ridiculously laborious.
Maybe easier to build a new system off-line and switch over to it.

# rpm -qa | wc -l
1672
# rpm -qa | grep fc4 | wc -l
259


I don't think that's a useful guide. Use
rpm -qa --qf '%{name} %{BUILDHOST}
'
to see who built what.
to see what else you can query,
rpm --querytags | less

--

Cheers
John

-- spambait
1aaaaaaa@coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa@coco.merseine.nu
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

You cannot reply off-list:-)

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Mike Yates writes:


Sam Varshavchik wrote:


You can reinstall them after the upgrade, and after you've updated the
core Fedora 8 install with all the current updates.




OK, but what an issue!
Does it apply to FC7 too?


I don't recall this cropping up until F8.


That looks ridiculously laborious.
Maybe easier to build a new system off-line and switch over to it.


Whatever works for you.


# rpm -qa | wc -l
1672
# rpm -qa | grep fc4 | wc -l
259


That does not tell you much. Only a small portion of packages have 'fc4' in
their release label.



Is there a tool to search the repositories for all those 1,413 which are
not obviously FC4 ?


Most of those 1413 packages are most certainly FC4. It's very unusual to
have more than 20-30 packages installed from non-Fedora repositories.


Most non-Fedora repositories have their own release naming convention. If
you have Livna set up, most of their packages have "lvn" as part of the
release name.


Doing this search "backwards" will likely give more accurate results.


--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list