[WBEL-users] updates

[Johnny Hughes]

On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 07:08 -0400, Thomas E Dukes wrote:
>  
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg Knaddison [mailto:greg.knaddison at gmail.com] 
> > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 12:21 AM
> > To: Thomas E Dukes
> > Cc: Jean Lee; whitebox-users at beau.org
> > Subject: Re: [WBEL-users] updates
> > 
> > On 6/29/05, Thomas E Dukes <edukes at alltel.net> wrote:
> > > 
> > > I was taking your advice and started configuring yum.  First, I 
> > > renamed /etc/yum.repos.d/wbelmirrors.yum to 
> > wbelmirrors.repo as yum.conf directs.
> > > 
> > > For some reason, yum is looking for wbel 2 instead of wbel 
> > 4.  To my 
> > > knowledge, I didn't think there was a wbel 2.  I believe it 
> > is getting '2'
> > > from Fedora 2 (the OS previously installed), but from 
> > where, I don't know.
> > > I tried changing $releasever in wbelmirrors to '4' but that didn't 
> > > work either.
> > 
> > Can you post the full error message?  That would be extremely helpful.
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I have tinkered a little since my last post.  I removed the fedora-release
> rpm and now get a different but similar error.  This was an upgrade from
> Fedora 2. A clean install was not an option as I run 4 websites off this
> system.
> 
> Instead of yum looking for '2' as the $releasever as previously posted, now
> that I have removed the fedora-release .rpm, it now indicates 'Null' as the
> release version.  I re-installed the wbel-release .rpm but to no effect.
> There is no yum error log.  It looks for the 'Null' directory on each mirror
> but errors because it cannot change to that directory because it does not
> exist.
> 
> There has to be another package I need to install to correct this but I
> can't figure which one.  I have the current versions of wbel-release and yum
> installed.
> 
> Again, thanks for everyone's help!
> 
> 
> > 
> > Also, did you do some sort of "upgrade" from Fedora to WBEL 
> > or did you completely wipe the disk clean and start over with 
> > WBEL?  If  you did an "upgrade" then you are more likely to 
> > have a variety of problems that we may not be able to solve.  
> > If you can, I would recommend a "clean" install where you 
> > remove all previous partitions.  If you did remove the 
> > previous partitions, great!  That will make troubleshooting 
> > and getting things working that much easier.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Greg
> > 
> 
> 

whitebox-release
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://beau.org/pipermail/whitebox-users/attachments/20050630/5ba5026d/attachment.bin