Description of problem: [root@hayes-01 ~]# rpm -V lvm2 S.5....T c /etc/lvm/lvm.conf [root@hayes-01 ~]# echo $? 1 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): lvm2-2.02.56-9.el5
it means that S - size of file differs 5 - MD5 sum differs T - mtime differs Because lvm2-cluster calls in the post /usr/sbin/lvmconf --lockinglibdir %{_libdir} it causes this change: @@ -220,6 +220,7 @@ # Miscellaneous global LVM2 settings global { + library_dir = "/usr/lib" # The file creation mask for any files and directories created. # Interpreted as octal if the first digit is zero. This change is useless now. But it is nothing new, I don't think it is blocker for z-stream release, anyway we should clean lvm2-cluster spec in 5.6 release. (when installing lvm2-cluster, you want probably change locking_type too) Updating only lvm2 is OK.
Refer to the TPS people I think - the 'c' means config file. It's quite reasonable for an installed config file to get updated!
<rbiba> %config(noreplace) %verify(not md5 mtime size) ... Please add this to spec file. As this is trivial fix in spec file, I would support including it before releasing any new package. Otherwise we'll be hitting this over and over again. This is not TPS problem, TPS just revealed it.
It will be fixed in 5.6, not in this release, sorry. If it is problem, I really must ask why QA found it in 5.5.z and not in 5.0....
(BTW fix also must also include modification of lvmconf and add the library_dir in base install/or remove it completely. Not run it in lvm2-cluster %post, no idea why it is done this way - we do not use external locking library in RHEL5 anyway. It is proibably some RHEL4 relic)
Fix in lvm2-2.02.73-1.el5.
[root@grant-01 ~]# rpm -V lvm2 [root@grant-01 ~]# echo $? 0 Fix verified in lvm2-2.02.74-1.el5.
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem described in this bug report. This report is therefore being closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files, please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report if the solution does not work for you. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-0052.html