Bug#289905: marked as done (libc6: why deb package rebuild the whole cache at each install)
Your message dated Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:39:19 +0900
with message-id <817jmirr1k.wl@omega.webmasters.gr.jp>
and subject line Bug#289905: libc6: why deb package rebuild the whole cache at each install
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 11 Jan 2005 18:39:26 +0000
>From prahal@wanadoo.fr Tue Jan 11 10:39:26 2005
Return-path: <prahal@wanadoo.fr>
Received: from smtp9.wanadoo.fr [193.252.22.22]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1CoQvN-0000OE-00; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:39:26 -0800
Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mwinf0908.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 400F61C00153;
Tue, 11 Jan 2005 19:38:54 +0100 (CET)
Received: from argos.server.maison (AToulouse-152-1-13-141.w82-125.abo.wanadoo.fr [82.125.11.141])
by mwinf0908.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 0B02D1C0014D;
Tue, 11 Jan 2005 19:38:54 +0100 (CET)
Received: from prahal by argos.server.maison with local (Exim 4.43)
id 1CoQus-0002GC-P5; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 19:38:54 +0100
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 19:38:54 +0100
From: browaeys.alban@wanadoo.fr
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: libc6: why deb package rebuild the whole cache at each install
Message-ID: <[🔎] 20050111183854.GA8616@argos.server.maison>
Reply-To: Alban Browaeys <browaeys.alban@wanadoo.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Reportbug-Version: 3.5
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.4 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE,
NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level:
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.2.ds1-20
Severity: wishlist
each package call ldconfig rebuilding the cache entirely :
should they use ldconfig -n ?
This is not a lib6 bug but i don t know which pacakge to bug , and i
guess you may be the one who know if there is a rationale behind not
using the -n switch.
Cheers
Alban
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.10
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8@euro, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8@euro (charmap=UTF-8)
Versions of packages libc6 depends on:
ii libdb1-compat 2.1.3-7 The Berkeley database routines [gl
-- no debconf information
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 289905-done) by bugs.debian.org; 13 Jan 2005 02:39:25 +0000
>From gotom@debian.or.jp Wed Jan 12 18:39:25 2005
Return-path: <gotom@debian.or.jp>
Received: from omega.webmasters.gr.jp (webmasters.gr.jp) [218.44.239.78]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1CoutR-0004RO-00; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:39:25 -0800
Received: from omega.webmasters.gr.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by webmasters.gr.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 4EA6CDEB4B; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:39:24 +0900 (JST)
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:39:19 +0900
Message-ID: <817jmirr1k.wl@omega.webmasters.gr.jp>
From: GOTO Masanori <gotom@debian.or.jp>
To: Alban Browaeys <browaeys.alban@wanadoo.fr>,
289905-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#289905: libc6: why deb package rebuild the whole cache at each install
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] 20050111183854.GA8616@argos.server.maison>
References: <[🔎] 20050111183854.GA8616@argos.server.maison>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.9.9 (Unchained Melody) SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya)
FLIM/1.14.3 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Unebigory=F2mae?=) APEL/10.3 Emacs/21.2
(i386-debian-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.3 - "Ushinoya")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Delivered-To: 289905-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level:
At Tue, 11 Jan 2005 19:38:54 +0100,
browaeys.alban@wanadoo.fr wrote:
> each package call ldconfig rebuilding the cache entirely :
> should they use ldconfig -n ?
>
> This is not a lib6 bug but i don t know which pacakge to bug , and i
> guess you may be the one who know if there is a rationale behind not
> using the -n switch.
I understand your complaints, but I diagree with your idea.
Calling ldconfig in postinst is added by dh_makeshlibs. So this is
not glibc issue. Moreover, -n means cache is not regenerated. So
when a library .so is installed in first time, /etc/ld.so.cache does
not have any that library entry. This means we need to search
library's path - so /etc/ld.so.cache becomes meaningless. Many lookup
cost needs to pay when we use ldconfig -n everytime in postinst.
BTW, I heard that dpkg v2 planned to handle about this inefficiency.
I close this report.
Regards,
-- gotom
Reply to: