Re: Less interactive upgrades.
On 16 Mar 2000 20:14:47 -0500, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> It's rather slow, since you need to unpack the .deb to get the md5sums
> for its conffiles, read /var/lib/dpkg/info/*.list to see if a conffiles
> still belongs to a package, /var/lib/dpkg/status to get the previous
> md5sums, etc.
Actually, some of the code I wrote for ddiff should be able to do this
rather quickly, since it can md5 a member of a package without having
to fully unpack it.
> Oh, and you're not really allowed to use things in
> /var/lib/dpkg/ directly anyway since the format might change. (Warning
> in advance: it will likely change this year).
Will the output of 'dpkg -s' remain stable? As I see it now, that and
the files on the disk are all I need.
> Oh, and you still loose if people don't use apt.
Yes, but if they don't use apt, then upgrades are probably infrequent
and hard anyway.
> > - Once the file is being appropriately created, dpkg will be modified
> > to optionally take as an argument to an option the name of the well
> > known file.
>
> Okay, just to warn you: a) I'm really anal about patches I accept for
> dpkg. b) I'm not sure I like this approach. c) I'm really anal about
> accepting patches.
a) gotcha.
b) Hm... Is there anything wrong with it, or is this a general fear
until code is written?
c) gotcha.
--
Tom Rothamel --------- http://onegeek.org/~tom/ ------- Using GNU/Linux
Writing from home, just outside Northport, NY.
The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (89% of Full).
Reply to: