openssl

[Peter Robinson]

"yum downgrade openssl" depending on openssl versions?

Peter

On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Kevin Gordon <kgordon420 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Peter:
>
> Unfortunately, no.  That brings us back to the first point:  a yum reinstall on the XO1 gives a not available from koji blah blah .....error way down at the end.
>
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry device via Gmail
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 18:54:43
> To: Kevin Gordon<kgordon420 at gmail.com>
> Cc: Martin Langhoff<martin.langhoff at gmail.com>; <devel at lists.laptop.org>
> Subject: Re: openssl
>
> On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 6:13 PM, Kevin Gordon <kgordon420 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Folks:
>>
>> Wasn't really complaining.  Just wanted upstream people to know in case they
>> were interested.
>>
>> For clarity, The 686 8n-1 openssl gets installed on both the XO-1 and the
>> XO-1.5.  After a fresh install:
>>
>> Doing a one-step yum update on the XO-1 upgrades it to the 8n-2, but
>> installs the 586 version
>> Doing a one-step yum update on the XO-2 upgrades it to the 8n-2, but
>> installs the 686 version
>>
>> In our deployments we always try to do it in two steps, a yum update
>> download-only to an SD card, then yum localinstall from the card,  to save
>> internet usage.
>>
>> In this two-step localinstall scenario, the XO-1 updated chosen (586)
>> actually refuses to update the installed older, but 686, version.
>>
>> On the  XO 1.5, there is no issue - the 686 8n-2 updates the installed 686
>> 8n-1
>>
>> Peter, absoulutely the right rpm switches can be used instead of yum to get
>> the desired one there when not doing a direct update. The other yum methods
>> are dangerous or ineffective since on the XO-1,a yum reinstall wont pick up
>> the original package, and a vanilla yum remove would delete about 3.5
>> million dependencies. That said, if I copy the 686 8n-2 rpm over to the XO-1
>> downloaded updates on the SD,  when doing the localinstall, it works fine.
>>
>> So, I am not complaining, I was more or less curious as to why a 686 was in
>> there at all, since all the rest of the stuff int the package list seems to
>> be 586, and there is a 586 openssl available. Perhaps,  I too much love
>> simplicity :-)
>>
>> But, in conclusion, I'm all good here.  If there is a specific bias for one
>> or the other (586 or 686) package, just let me know and I can make both the
>> XO-1 and the XO 1.5 happy with that version.
>
> you should be able to do a "yum reinstall openssl" to install what yum
> thinks is the correct package without having to remove all
> dependencies.
>
> Peter
>
>> PS: Martin, we haven't deployed 852 in Kenya so I hadn't seen this before in
>> 10.1.2.  We'll be upgrading them all from a mixed XO-1 set of 711 and 802;
>> and the 1.5's with 205/206 both of which never had the 686 installed.  So,
>> in preparation of when we go back in March, we're working with 10.1.3/3xx
>> assuming that it will be the new signed build generation.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> KG
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 2:36 AM, Martin Langhoff
>>> <martin.langhoff at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Kevin Gordon <kgordon420 at gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >> Any reason that the openssl 0.9.8n-1.fc11 is of the 686 architecture as
>>> >> bundled in the os360 packages?  Causes a bit of grief on localinstalls
>>> >> and
>>> >
>>> > This was also on 10.1.2 as can be seen in the link below . The
>>> > compaints are bogus my understanding is that -- Fedora keeps its i686
>>> > builds compatible with Geode. Why is yum getting confused I dunno --
>>> > perhaps it's reading the kernel uname. On XO-1 builds, the kernel is
>>> > i586.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > http://download.laptop.org/xo-1.5/os/official/os852/4GB/os852.packages.txt
>>> >
>>> > cheers,
>>>
>>> I don't think the change to the rpm arch file that made geode i686
>>> capable was made until post F-11 (F-12 from mem) so I think you need
>>> to add a command to rpm to use the i686 version or install the
>>> i586/i386 variant.
>>>
>>> Peter
>>
>>
>