Re: Apt and NFS?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000, Eric Gillespie, Jr. wrote:
> > IIRC, that's the problem that prompted me to mount /var/cache/apt nolock.
> > Whether it was or not, I haven't had any problems with it since adding the
> > nolock.
>
> That fixed it. Thanks!
Note that this is not a very nice fix. It gets you around the problem of
locking by returning no error message when a program asks for a file lock
on the filesystem. There is no file lock given, though, which is
typically a bad thing because the program asked for a lock for a
reason. Typically (as in apt-get) this is a write-only lock, used to
ensure that only a single 'apt-get update' can write to this file at any
given time. You can't imagine how messed up things can get if two
processes are trying to update the same files.
The best way to do it is to use the kernel space NFS server, as it does
support file locking and will allow programs like dpkg to work as
intended.
noah
_______________________________________________________
| Web: http://web.morgul.net/~frodo/
| PGP Public Key: http://web.morgul.net/~frodo/mail.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBOc93HodCcpBjGWoFAQEyhQP/Xbwtb3Hq/t9urZn6F03r89K1VIp3rMmp
PMK0QTdznvpZ/olM4MyKvUoXVPD/UubJVOpX2BV3jnaQijCehLWHH8u5yl18/Tgc
tjoz/DLl+GmuSWCPCP8q2aDW0tZmWcQ/COtdIa4egdx4lGs5dm7VdKTiFMAiynX+
DViQvsfvaxQ=
=eF61
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: