Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 10:56:14PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
>> #include
>> * Eduard Bloch [Sat, Mar 18 2006, 10:52:53PM]:
>> > #include
>> > * Bill Allombert [Sat, Mar 18 2006, 02:56:27PM]:
>> > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 01:56:13PM +0100, Eduard Blo
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 10:56:14PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Eduard Bloch [Sat, Mar 18 2006, 10:52:53PM]:
> > #include
> > * Bill Allombert [Sat, Mar 18 2006, 02:56:27PM]:
> > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 01:56:13PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > > > Hi people,
> ...
> > > ld.so manp
#include
* Eduard Bloch [Sat, Mar 18 2006, 10:52:53PM]:
> #include
> * Bill Allombert [Sat, Mar 18 2006, 02:56:27PM]:
> > On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 01:56:13PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > > Hi people,
...
> > ld.so manpage imply the opposite.
>
> I would not be that sure. Following that manpage
#include
* Bill Allombert [Sat, Mar 18 2006, 02:56:27PM]:
> On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 01:56:13PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > Hi people,
> >
> > I just wondered why exactly my laptop uses that much time for updates
> > and I think that calling ldconfig is a main problem. In theory, it
> > should
On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 01:56:13PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> Hi people,
>
> I just wondered why exactly my laptop uses that much time for updates
> and I think that calling ldconfig is a main problem. In theory, it
> should not cost much time because VFS cache has the relevant file parts.
> How
Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> #include
> * Goswin von Brederlow [Wed, Mar 15 2006, 03:17:29PM]:
>> Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > #include
>> > * Goswin von Brederlow [Tue, Mar 14 2006, 10:11:43PM]:
>> >
>> >> >> What is a depends? Do you mean dependency or depend
#include
* Goswin von Brederlow [Wed, Mar 15 2006, 03:17:29PM]:
> Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > #include
> > * Goswin von Brederlow [Tue, Mar 14 2006, 10:11:43PM]:
> >
> >> >> What is a depends? Do you mean dependency or dependents?
> >> >
> >> > I think he means dependents: If
Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> #include
> * Goswin von Brederlow [Tue, Mar 14 2006, 10:11:43PM]:
>
>> >> What is a depends? Do you mean dependency or dependents?
>> >
>> > I think he means dependents: If package foo depends on library foobar,
>> > dpkg/apt can unpack and configure-wi
#include
* Goswin von Brederlow [Tue, Mar 14 2006, 10:11:43PM]:
> >> What is a depends? Do you mean dependency or dependents?
> >
> > I think he means dependents: If package foo depends on library foobar,
> > dpkg/apt can unpack and configure-without-ldconfig all packages that
> > don't depend o
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> dpkg-hook /usr/lib/man/update-manpages - run only once in total
>>> dpkg-hook --on-depends foobar ldconfig - run once before depends of foobar
>>
>> What is a depends? Do you mean dependency or dependents?
>
#include
* Bill Allombert [Tue, Mar 14 2006, 04:20:28AM]:
> On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 01:56:13PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > Hi people,
> >
> > I just wondered why exactly my laptop uses that much time for updates
> > and I think that calling ldconfig is a main problem. In theory, it
> > should
Brendan O'Dea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> dpkg would then run any pending hooks (with diagnostics as proposed by
> Eduard in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) by calling:
I would like to add a wish WRT diagnostics: There should be a
commandline option (handled with --add-option) that has the effect that
the
* Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > If someone happens to install sonamed libfoo.so only but rely on
> > ldconfig to create the libfoo.so.N symlink
> It takes about 20 seconds to find out that Debian policy does forbid
> such a packaging - see the last pa
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 04:20:28AM -0600, Bill Allombert wrote:
>I offer to implement a update-ldconfig program that would work the same
>way update-menus work, by checking a lock and forking in the background
>and waiting for the dpkg lock.
It's more than just update-menus and ldconfig. update-m
Scripsit Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> If someone happens to install sonamed libfoo.so only but rely on
> ldconfig to create the libfoo.so.N symlink
> Ralf (no I don't know whether Debian policy already forbids this setup)
It takes about 20 seconds to find out that Debian policy does
On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 01:56:13PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> Hi people,
>
> I just wondered why exactly my laptop uses that much time for updates
> and I think that calling ldconfig is a main problem. In theory, it
> should not cost much time because VFS cache has the relevant file parts.
> How
#include
* Frank Küster [Tue, Mar 14 2006, 09:52:06AM]:
> Registering the TeX fonts, on the other hand, is a good candidate for
> delayed execution: It takes long each time it is done, many packages do
> it in their postinst, and it will fail with the first package that is
> configured, no matter
[ Please Cc: me on replies ]
> Therefore it is crucial that only commands
>
> - that cannot sensibly be assumed to fail, und any circumstances
> including f'cked up filesystems,
> can be allowed.
That would exclude ldconfig then. If someone happens to install sonamed
libfoo.so only but rely o
Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * delayed execution
> * instantaneous execution (purges cache)
> * instantaneous execution if an operation is pending, nothing else
>(purge the cache).
>
> e.g. If a package uses tex to build some sort of documentation at
> install time (I know
> "Goswin" == Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> - there are no dangerous transitions (libc5->libc6) that would
>> require having updated ld.so.cache immediately - all
>> applications should follow the ld.so.conf paths if something is
>> not in the cache. No pro
Le Lun 13 Mars 2006 19:46, Eduard Bloch a écrit :
> #include
>
> * Pierre Habouzit [Mon, Mar 13 2006, 07:16:22PM]:
> > > What is a depends? Do you mean dependency or dependents?
> > > Further, I would not depend on package installation operations
> > > but instead invent something like "dpkg-hook
Le Lun 13 Mars 2006 18:38, Eduard Bloch a écrit :
> #include
>
> * Goswin von Brederlow [Sun, Mar 12 2006, 03:35:42PM]:
> > I think it would be a good idea to have a general dpkg hook to
> > register a command to be run at the end of dpkg. The syntax would
> > be something like this:
> >
> > dpkg-
Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ehm... all the time I talk about non-critical things! Dealing with
> success checking in merged commands would be insane, we cannot assign
> the failure to a certain package (except when there is just one, of
> course).
>
[...]
> First, if dpkg-hook is imp
#include
* Frank Küster [Mon, Mar 13 2006, 07:28:42PM]:
> Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> dpkg-hook /usr/lib/man/update-manpages - run only once in total
> >> dpkg-hook --on-depends foobar ldconfig - run once before depends of foobar
> >
> > What is a depends? Do you mean depende
#include
* Pierre Habouzit [Mon, Mar 13 2006, 07:16:22PM]:
> > What is a depends? Do you mean dependency or dependents?
> > Further, I would not depend on package installation operations but
> > instead invent something like "dpkg-hook --execute ldconfig" to run
> > outstanding tasks noted under
Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> dpkg-hook /usr/lib/man/update-manpages - run only once in total
>> dpkg-hook --on-depends foobar ldconfig - run once before depends of foobar
>
> What is a depends? Do you mean dependency or dependents?
I think he means dependents: If package foo depe
#include
* Goswin von Brederlow [Sun, Mar 12 2006, 03:35:42PM]:
> I think it would be a good idea to have a general dpkg hook to
> register a command to be run at the end of dpkg. The syntax would be
> something like this:
>
> dpkg-hook /usr/lib/man/update-manpages - run only once in total
> dp
Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi people,
>
> I just wondered why exactly my laptop uses that much time for updates
> and I think that calling ldconfig is a main problem. In theory, it
> should not cost much time because VFS cache has the relevant file parts.
> However, if memory is li
Hi people,
I just wondered why exactly my laptop uses that much time for updates
and I think that calling ldconfig is a main problem. In theory, it
should not cost much time because VFS cache has the relevant file parts.
However, if memory is limited and there are other applications running,
the V
29 matches
Mail list logo
