On Monday 28 December 2009 02:07:55 Marko Vojinovic wrote: > On Monday 28 December 2009 00:50:00 Ashley M. Kirchner wrote: > > Jussi Lehtola wrote: > > > You just should have added the SOLVED keyword to the subject a few days > > > ago :) > > > > Actually, not quite. While the system is up and running just fine, > > with all updates and all, that doesn't solve the issue of those warnings > > received during the update process. That's why I didn't 'SOLVED' the > > subject. Those warnings don't seem to have any ill effect (to me), > > however I don't think it's ok either. So that why I was asking, is it > > something that needs to be addressed? Is it something I'm missing? Is > > it something with the update process? Is it something that's genuinely > > missing from the kernel? I don't know. > > As far as I recall, this is the artifact of the change in the policy of > updating initramfs.img file while installing a new kernel. > > I forgot the actual bugzilla link (you can probably use google to find it), > but the story goes more or less like this (I'm writing this from remaining > memory of reading the bugzilla, might be way incorrect): Ok, I found the actual bugzilla in my firefox history: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=544901 and a little better explanation here: http://www.codemonkey.org.uk/2009/12/10/annoying-kernel-packaging-bug/ Now, while there are no actual references here to the missing modules problem, I somehow understood (googling around) that those messages are the consequence of deltarpm failing to deal with the initramfs file correctly. You may be seeing a completely separate and unrelated issue, but I would bet that your case is the same as mine. HTH, :-) Marko -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
