network has gone down again, and I cannot figure out why

[David G. Miller]

Ric Moore <wayward4now at gmail.com> wrote:

>Sort of responding to my own post...  Given the above, I found the 
>> following output from yum today to be quite amusing:
>> 
>> Added 63 new packages, deleted 51 old in 28.11 seconds
>> Resolving Dependencies
>> --> Populating transaction set with selected packages. Please wait.
>> ---> Downloading header for bind-config to pack into transaction set.
>> bind-config-9.3.2-20.FC5. 100% |=========================|  35 kB    
>> 00:00    
>> ---> Package bind-config.i386 30:9.3.2-20.FC5 set to be updated
>> --> Running transaction check
>> --> Processing Dependency: bind = 30:9.3.2-20.FC5 for package: bind-config
>> --> Finished Dependency Resolution
>> Error: Missing Dependency: bind = 30:9.3.2-20.FC5 is needed by package 
>> bind-config
>> Thu Sep 28 12:50:31 MDT 2006
>> [root at spindle ~]# rpm -q bind
>> bind-9.3.2-33.fc5
>> [root at spindle ~]# rpm -q bind-config
>> package bind-config is not installed
>> 
>> Looks like some part of FC5 still thinks bind-config is needed.  I have 
>> a funny feeling I'll have to figure out why or yum updates will fail on 
>> bind-config dependencies until I do.
>  
>
>
>
>I went for broke, as I posted earlier in the week, and installed the FC6
>bind rpms and the system-setup* rpms and this crate runs smooth. I would
>hazard a guess that any one with weirdness going on, on their network,
>network printers, file sharing, you name it, might be in those packages.
>I notice that it tried to update you from 30:9.3.2-20 and it would have
>taken you to 2-35 I think it was. That's where it went to Hell. I'm
>using 2.41 from FC6 and it's great. No more strange stuff in hosts,
>either. All weirdness gone. Ric
>
Looks like somebody at Fedora resolved the problem.  I just re-ran "yum 
update" on my FC5 box and got no complaints about bind-config.

Cheers,
Dave

-- 
Politics, n. Strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles.
-- Ambrose Bierce