Bug 38349 - Duplicate RPM Database entries after upgrade from 6.2
Duplicate RPM Database entries after upgrade from 6.2
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: anaconda (Show other bugs)
i686 Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Brent Fox
David Lawrence
Upgrade performed using 7.1 install p...
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2001-04-29 19:59 EDT by Need Real Name
Modified: 2007-04-18 12:32 EDT (History)
0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2001-05-09 12:42:44 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Need Real Name 2001-04-29 19:59:18 EDT
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows 98)

I installed Redhat 6.2 using the "server" configuration then immedately 
upgraded to 7.1.  After the upgrade to 7.1 I noticed my RPM database has 
two entries, one for the older file, and a second for the new file.  So 
for example, Sendmail-8.9 and Sendmail-8.11 are both listed as being 
installed.  Likewise Apache 1.3.12 and 1.3.19 are also listed.

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install RedHat 6.2 in Server configuration
2. Upgrade to Redhat 7.1
3. Type 'rpm -qa|grep sendmail' You will see two versions of sendmail 

Actual Results:  Duplicate entries are shown

Expected Results:  Only a single entry for the upgraded product.

I read in the RedHat message board someone else was experiencing the same 
Comment 1 Jeff Johnson 2001-05-06 10:04:29 EDT
How did you upgrade? If you used --install/-i rather than --upgrade/-U, then
duplicate entries is exactly what is to be expected.
Comment 2 Need Real Name 2001-05-06 12:39:38 EDT
The upgrade was performed by booting the 7.1 installation disk and selecting 
upgrade.  Very similar to a new install but you select "upgrade" instead 
of "install".
Comment 3 Jeff Johnson 2001-05-06 12:43:20 EDT
OK, off to anaconda to find out what's up. I certainly haven't heard of this
problem before ...
Comment 4 Brent Fox 2001-05-09 12:42:39 EDT
I set up a test machine with a fresh server install of 6.2.  I then immediately
upgraded to 7.1...the RPM database looks fine...no duplicate entries.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.