Getting lots of errors updating (non vm) packages but reports successfull install

9 posts / 0 new
Last post
#1 Fri, 10/23/2009 - 14:31

Getting lots of errors updating (non vm) packages but reports successfull install

This doesn't happen for all system packages, but for a lot I am getting this type of error (CentOS : [quote] Now updating arptables_jf ..

  Installing package(s) with command yum -y install arptables_jf ..

  warning: /etc/rc.d/init.d/arptables_jf saved as /etc/rc.d/init.d/arptables_jf.rpmsave
  Setting up Install Process
  Setting up repositories
  Reading repository metadata in from local files
  Parsing package install arguments
  Resolving Dependencies
  --> Populating transaction set with selected packages. Please wait.
  ---> Package arptables_jf.x86_64 0:0.0.8-3.el4 set to be updated
  --> Running transaction check

  Dependencies Resolved

   Package                 Arch       Version          Repository        Size 
   arptables_jf            x86_64     0.0.8-3.el4      base               96 k

  Transaction Summary
  Install      0 Package(s)         
  Update       1 Package(s)         
  Remove       0 Package(s)         
  Total download size: 96 k
  Downloading Packages:
  Running Transaction Test
  Finished Transaction Test
  Transaction Test Succeeded
  Running Transaction
    Updating  : arptables_jf                 ######################### [1/2]error: unpacking of archive failed on file /sbin/arptables;4ae1f694: cpio: open

  Updated: arptables_jf.x86_64 0:0.0.8-3.el4

  .. install complete.


As you can see it reports an error unpacking, but also reports that the install was complete. Is this something to be concerned about?

A side question: Also above says "warning: /etc/rc.d/init.d/arptables_jf saved as /etc/rc.d/init.d/arptables_jf.rpmsave". Why does this happen and what does it mean? Do I have to do something with the rmpsave files?

Fri, 10/23/2009 - 14:40


Those warnings mean that:

  1. A config file isn't at it's default (or so the RPM thinks)

  2. The RPM is configured to put the new config file it has into production

Rather than simply overwrite what you have there, it's notifying you that it's saving the current file as ".rpmsave" before copying the new file out there.

Which all means absolutely nothing, so long as everything continues to work as expected :-)

If, on the other hand, you notice any unusual behavior, you'll want to compare the new config versus the old one, and determine what changed in order to get things working again.

I'd keep the rpmsave files around until you're absolutely certain that everything is working as expected.


Fri, 10/23/2009 - 15:05 (Reply to #2)

Thanks Eric. Can you comment about the error regarding unpacking?

Fri, 10/23/2009 - 15:22 (Reply to #3)

Hrm, I don't see anything in that which mentions an error unpacking.

Am I just blind (it can happen!), or did something not show up when you pasted that in?


Fri, 10/23/2009 - 16:16

Its in the "running transaction" section but it looks like the forum software cuts it off.

Running Transaction Updating : arptables_jf ######################### [1/2]error: unpacking of archive failed on file /sbin/arptables;4ae1f694: cpio: open

This is happening on a lot of updates.

Sun, 10/25/2009 - 03:46 (Reply to #5)
Joe's picture

This is going to be an error with yum or RPM or the package, and not something we're going to have any control over. You'll probably need to bring it up with your OS provider.

But, to further narrow it down: does this error happen when you install something using RPM directly?


Check out the forum guidelines!

Fri, 10/23/2009 - 19:31

Ahh, that almost sounds like the packages are corrupted.

You might want to try running "yum clean all" and attempt the update again.

You may also want to verify that you aren't seeing any disk errors in the "dmesg" output.

Additionally, are you sure you have plenty of disk space?


Sun, 10/25/2009 - 14:57 (Reply to #7)

Thank you both I found the problem. This box is compromised and the immutable bit was set on those files not allowing them to be overwritten. The box is offline pending an overhaul.

Now another question, how do you force rpm to (re)install a particular package without worrying about its dependencies? I dont think you can do this with yum but can with rpm, but I rarely use rpm so am for initscripts.x86_64.


Sun, 10/25/2009 - 15:25 (Reply to #8)

I answer this with the assumption that you know exactly what you're doing... the need for this is extremely rare and can certainly cause trouble :-)

To reinstall a package, you can use rpm's --reinstall param. To ignore dependencies, you can use --nodeps.

But, I've rarely ever seen a need to use --nodeps. Either the right dependencies are or are not installed, and if they aren't, you need to be careful :-)


Topic locked