Bug 1366343
Summary: | spacewalk-clone-by-date could use clearer output/logging | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Satellite 5 | Reporter: | Grant Gainey <ggainey> |
Component: | Usability | Assignee: | Grant Gainey <ggainey> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Jan Hutař <jhutar> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | 570 | CC: | jhutar, tlestach |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | spacewalk-utils-2.3.2-25-sat | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2016-08-22 12:24:44 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
Grant Gainey
2016-08-11 17:26:27 UTC
spacewalk.github: 8f579698fff90318fbc715aeaeba180f10fe048e spacewalk.github: d5e884e332367bf4384bacdb9fa71bab1af65770 * Cleaned up output found in /var/log/rhn/errata-clone.log to make the sequence a little clearer * Added summery output at the command line: === ... Solving Dependencies (3): ________________________________________ ######################################## - complete Processing Dependencies: ________________________________________ ######################################## - complete 29 RPM(s) added to atest-1-rhel-x86_64-server-6 to resolve dependencies. Please see /var/log/rhn/errata-clone.log for details. === * Updated the spacewalk-clone-by-date man page to include a "LOG OUTPUT" section In man page we say log file is /var/log/rhn/errata_clone.log, but actually it is /var/log/rhn/errata-clone.log. Do we want to respin packages for this, or should I just create new bug for that? Otherwise sanity seems to be good. Patch itself seems good as well. According to git, this inconsistency has been introduced in commit mentioned in Comment#1. Let's fix it. :-) (In reply to Tomas Lestach from comment #7) > According to git, this inconsistency has been introduced in commit mentioned > in Comment#1. Let's fix it. :-) Strongly concur - I'm on it spacewalk.github: 55bde7c98e801da827d9470c932faf6289f5656f Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2016-1645.html |