On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 7:17 PM, Denis Washington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 13:01 -0400, Jeff Johnson wrote: > > On Jun 21, 2008, at 12:48 PM, Denis Washington wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 12:27 -0400, Jeff Johnson wrote: > > >> On Jun 21, 2008, at 12:05 PM, Denis Washington wrote: > > >> > > >>> > > >>> What if the transaction fails? register_package() would have > > >>> returned > > >>> without error although the registration was unsuccessful then, > > >>> and all > > >>> files would already be installed. > > >>> > > >> > > >> What if you've added a header, but your daemon exits before > > >> successfully computing and adding RPMTAG_SIZE withthe > > >> _close_package() method? > > > > > > Got me. Although, if a dummy value (e.g. 0) was added in > > > _register_package(), an unsuccessful _close_package() wouldn't be a > > > harm > > > at all. The header would be complete anyway. > > > > > > > Hint: RPMTAG_SIZE simply does not matter. Nor do Vendor: Packager: > > Description: Summary: and all the other goopiness carried in > > markup (because its easy to add) and rpmdb Headers. > > > > OTOH, RPMTAG_FILESTATES is gonna matter a _LOT_. So > > will leaving stale locks, and forgetting to attach stderr when > > your widdle daemon forks. > > Could you explain what should go in RPM_FILESTATES? It's not listed in > the LSB specification. > Sorry, but who care on LSB RPM specification aka RPM v3 (other for some useful docu) ? RPM 4.4.2 could not produce it, do you know ? Also , do you know that the LSB RPM spec was bourne only because "someone" suggest to write some referral on the LSB on "MAXIMUN RPM" ? Also again do you know that in "REDHAT RPM GUIDE" "someone" suggest the author to describe in appendices the RPMV3 package format only for the better docu ? And guess who it is this "someone" ? R : Jeff Johnson So think more carefully before expressing silly opinions on Jeff Johnson, which authority in the filed is beyond discussion.
