Bug 1129816

Summary:	cpuspeed package for RHEL 5.11 (1.2.1-11.el5) is older than the cpuspeed erratum we shipped for 5.10
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5	Reporter:	Mike Gahagan <mgahagan>
Component:	cpuspeed	Assignee:	Petr Šabata <psabata>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Red Hat Kernel QE team <kernel-qe>
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	high
Version:	5.11	CC:	jorton
Target Milestone:	rc
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2015-02-26 08:57:38 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Mike Gahagan 2014-08-13 17:48:37 UTC

Description of problem:

TPS RHNQA in the errata tool found an issue with our 5.11 cpuspeed package. Here is what I think happened:

We cut a new cpuspeed package for 5.11 to fix bz 887256 (1.2.1-11.el5). Some time later we got a request to build a z-stream package with the same fix in it (1.2.1-11.el5_10, bz 1078211) and we released it. Systems with cpuspeed installed now can only update to version 1.2.1-11.el5_10 since rpm considers that package to be newer than 1.2.1-11.el5. 

It appears that we need to re-spin cpuspeed to bump up the release number so it will appear to be newer than the 5.10.z version. No code changes should be needed.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
cpuspeed-1.2.1-11.el5_10 & cpuspeed-1.2.1-11.el5

How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Try an yum update to 5.11 cpuspeed with the 5.10.z version installed.
2.
3.

Actual results:
only cpuspeed-1.2.1-11.el5_10 is available

Expected results:
5.11 version of cpuspeed needs a higher release number so it appears newer to rpm/yum

Additional info:

Comment 1 Petr Šabata 2014-08-14 07:55:19 UTC

I think this is a rather common situation.  Is the update even necessary?  The contents of the packages are identical and any hypothetical future updates would automatically update from 1.2.1-11.el5_10 to 1.2.1-12.el5+.

Comment 3 Joe Orton 2015-02-26 08:57:38 UTC

This was resolved by dropping the 5.11 errata.