[Pulp-list] Missing Erratum

Matthew Madey mattmadey at gmail.com
Fri Jun 3 15:21:17 UTC 2016


Ah yep, that makes perfect sense. I was previously seeing some issues
syncing Pulp with Spacewalk on Pulp version 2.4.. the repo sync log kept
showing errors that hundreds of errata were being skipped due to empty
package list.. I've since reinstalled Pulp with version 2.8 and that seems
to have cleared things up.

On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Michael Hrivnak <mhrivnak at redhat.com> wrote:

> Using good-old curl, grep, and wc, I also came up with 3645 errata in the
> RHEL 6 current "server" repo for x86_64 on the Red Hat CDN. One possible
> explanation for seeing more errata at the RHN link is that some of them
> might be architecture-specific, and thus wouldn't show up in the x86_64
> repo you sync'd. There are probably some other reasonable explanations as
> well.
>
> One way or another, you definitely got all of the errata that are
> available in that repo on the Red Hat CDN.
>
> Michael
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Matthew Madey <mattmadey at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> When I sync Pulp with the RHEL repositories, I notice I'm missing
>> hundreds of Errata.. even though I don't have any errors when running the
>> sync. For instance, looking at my RHEL6 repo in Pulp, it shows 3645
>> Erratum. When I look at Red Hat's advisory board (
>> https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rhel-server-6-errata.html), it shows 3,837 Errata.
>> Why the discrepancy?
>>
>> Display Name:        rhel-x86_64-server-6-base
>> Description:         None
>> Content Unit Counts:
>>   Erratum:                3645
>>   Package Category:       10
>>   Package Group:          202
>>   Rpm:                    35911
>>   Yum Repo Metadata File: 1
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pulp-list mailing list
>> Pulp-list at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-list/attachments/20160603/83d32512/attachment.htm>


More information about the Pulp-list mailing list