Re: unfamilar errors in this evenings updates

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Claude Jones wrote:
I use smart, and have had no problems for months, but this evening I got the following error messages -
Output from libwmf-0.2.8.4-5.2@i386:
error: %post(libwmf-0.2.8.4-5.2.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 255

Output from selinux-policy-2.3.2-1.fc5@noarch:
error: %post(selinux-policy-2.3.2-1.fc5.noarch) scriptlet failed, exit status 255

Output from libsane-hpaio-1.6.6a-1.1@i386:
error: %post(libsane-hpaio-1.6.6a-1.1.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 255

Output from sendmail-8.13.7-2.fc5.1@i386:
error: %pre(sendmail-8.13.7-2.fc5.1.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 255
error:   install: %pre scriptlet failed (2), skipping sendmail-8.13.7-2.fc5.1

Output from system-config-kickstart-2.6.6-5@noarch:
error: %post(system-config-kickstart-2.6.6-5.noarch) scriptlet failed, exit status 255

Output from coreutils-5.97-1.1@i386:
error: %pre(coreutils-5.97-1.1.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 255
error:   install: %pre scriptlet failed (2), skipping coreutils-5.97-1.1

Output from hplip-1.6.6a-1.1@i386:
error: %post(hplip-1.6.6a-1.1.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 255

I've never seen these "scriptlet failed" errors - anyone else getting these, or know what they're about?

This error sounds like a problem with SELinux or a problem with the labeling of your filesystem because of SELinux not having the proper security rights to install itself.

Try running setenforce 0 in a root terminal before attempting to upgrade your system.

For the %pre scriptlet errors, I do not think that there will be too much of a problem since the installation of the new rpm never took place. You should still have the older version on your system. When you have a %post scritlet error, you will have the latest rpm installed and a database entry for the previous version. In the past, I erased the database entry for the previous version and took it that the rpm was installed with all needed elements. I thought of another option that would probably work out better to ensure program integrity. The thought is to remove the latest version database entry and leave in the actually replaced version in the rpm database. Then performing an update should complete all of the intended functions for the %pre and %post scriptlets which would ensure users were added if needed and file permissions were properly set. THe only thing that I am unsure of is if rpm would bomb out because it was looking for files with specific information such as library files with specific filenames which changed. Just a thought!

The safest way to ensure the rpms are installed properly in my view is to download the versions with the %pre and %post problems, turn off selinux enforcing as mentioned earlier, then run rpm with the --replacefiles --replacepkgs flags. I have run this option from the rpms yum downloaded to the cache and changed to that particular derectoy and ran rpm as described above. The results were that the multiple versions in the rpm database were cleared and the programs seem to function correctly now.

Jim

--
Some people live life in the fast lane.  You're in oncoming traffic.


[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux