On Thu, 2008-02-21 at 16:17 +0100, Florian Festi wrote: > If it gets implemented that simple we can get deadlocked quite easily. > > instance 1: lock repo1 > instance 2: lock repo2 > instance 1: lock repo2 -> wait > instance 2: lock repo1 -> wait -> deadlock
Well the only thing I wasn't sure about is if that was possible, at least I think the repos will always be in the same order due to glob() ordering alphabetically. enable/disable repo. confuses this somewhat, so I'm not convinced it works in those cases (and GUI etc. apps. would need to lock everything, I think). > The solution is to release all acquired locks when a lock cannot be > obtained. But this requires that there is a central place in the code that > acquires all the locks at once - otherwise see above... Not only that but we'd need to be able to deal with the cache changing mid usage which we can't do atm. ... so releasing locks isn't possible AFAIK. -- James Antill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Red Hat
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Yum-devel mailing list Yum-devel@linux.duke.edu https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/yum-devel
