On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 09:40:37 +0100 Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Wed, 2018-08-01 at 09:06 +0200, Frank Elsner wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Aug 2018 08:50:27 +0200 Frank Elsner wrote:
> > On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 23:15:57 -0700 Samuel Sieb wrote:
> > > On 07/31/2018 10:57 PM, Frank Elsner wrote:
> > > > Can you please explain the line
> > > > 2018-08-01T05:53:36Z INFO Installed: kernel-4.17.9-200.fc28.i686
> > > > from /var/log/dnf.rpm.log of my 32bit F28 system?
> > >
> > > What is there to explain? That is version 4.17.9 of the kernel, 32-bit
> > > non-PAE, built for F28.
> > > Do you have more than 4GB of RAM in the computer?
> >
> > Ok, my fault. This old system with 2GB runs a non-PAE kernel.
> >
> > But on my TP x230i with 8GB running F28 file /var/log/dnf.rpm.log shows
> > 2018-07-23T08:41:52Z INFO Installed: kernel-PAE-4.17.7-100.fc27.i686
> > ^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Forget this. That was before the upgrade to F28. Overlooked that
>
> > And yumex shows kernel-4.17.9-200.fc28 for arch i686 available in updates
repo.
> > So, my question is: What could prevent dnf from offering this version for
update?
>
> This question is still awaiting an answer.
I don't use yumex, but if it's looking in the yum database while dnf
looks in the dnf one, there could be an inconsistency. Just a thought.
Thanks. I didn't know that.
But if I do "yum update" the newer kernel isn't offered :-(
Cheers, Frank