Bug 13101

Summary:	Packages not upgraded should perhaps be written to upgrade.log
Product:	[Retired] Red Hat Linux	Reporter:	Pekka Savola <pekkas>
Component:	anaconda	Assignee:	Matt Wilson <msw>
Status:	CLOSED RAWHIDE	QA Contact:	Brock Organ <borgan>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	7.1	Keywords:	FutureFeature
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	i386
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Enhancement
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2000-07-25 15:52:13 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	14489

Description Pekka Savola 2000-06-27 09:46:22 UTC

An interesting new feature would be the list of packages written to
upgrade.log that weren't either obsoleted or upgraded (or the version   
stayed the same).  

In other words, packages Redhat doesn't support in its base system, or has
dropped the support of (e.g. AfterStep). This could also
help in diagonizing problems when you know which packages _should_ be
upgraded..

Comment 1 Matt Wilson 2000-07-07 18:57:00 UTC

In CVS.

Comment 2 Pekka Savola 2000-07-23 18:57:32 UTC

Verified in beta4.

However, " " or "\n" was forgotten from the code, as the list seems a little funny:

cp: TmpFile: No such file or directory
The following packages were available on the CD but NOT upgraded:
nasm-0.98-5.i386.rpmprinttool-3.48-1.noarch.rpm[....]

cp: TmpFile -problem is probably related to this too.

Added some enhancement thoughts to #14489.

Comment 3 Matt Wilson 2000-07-25 15:52:11 UTC

\n bug fixed.

Comment 4 Pekka Savola 2000-07-27 12:07:20 UTC

Fixed in beta5.