[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: blew away /var/lib/apt/lists/ again



* Dan Jacobson (jidanni@dman.ddts.net) [020703 00:55]:
> I am looking in /var/lib/apt/lists/
> I see I have got
> debian.linux.org.tw_debian_dists_woody_main_binary-i386_Packages
> but uname -a says
> Linux debian 2.4.18-k7 #1 Sun Apr 14 13:19:11 EST 2002 i686 unknown
> I.e. I am a 686 not 386.  Is this bad?

Not at all. A 686 is a 386 =) It's the same architecture, but programs
can be optimized for newer modesl (i.e. 686) at compile-time. The kernel
you run is optimized for the k7, and thus reports 686. Programs that say
i386 will run just fine. Some people insist on having everything
optimized and compiled for their newer chips, but really, the difference
is negligible (unless maybe you're talking about a very
processor-intensive program).

> Also I had 8 cdrom's worth of lists in /var/lib/apt/lists/.  I see
> these got blown away.  It seems it is very easy to blow away things in
> /var/lib/apt/lists/ .
> 
> I suppose I should make back ups of it.  But then I'm sure restoring
> backups to it would mess something else up.

No need. apt-get update will populate this directory. You probably
shouldn't play with it by hand at all. (I don't think you'll damage
anything, but I don't think it should be necessary; just let apt do it.)

> please tell me [on this board] under what conditions will one blow
> away a file on /var/lib/apt/lists/?

Yes, just remove the corresponding lines from sources.list and update.

> I must not have cdroms on the sources.list if I go on the network [modem man
> me] to "update"?
> 
> I must not have the mirror on the sources.list if I want something
> from the CDs?

Well, there you go. That's why the lists keep disappearing. When they
get removed from sources.list, apt removes the info for them next time
you update. So each time you remove one, the lists are wiped.

> I use wwwoffle.  If I am offline I suppose I can this fool it into

I don't know anything about wwwoffle, but I don't suspect that anything
I'm saying is invalidated by your using it.

> thinking it [dselect] is getting its list.  If not it will blow away
> files in /var/lib/apt/lists/?

dselect doesn't use anything in /var/lib/apt directly. dselect calls on
apt to download packages to install, and apt uses data there to know
what's available for download (or copying from cdrom) and the URL to get
it.

> Maybe with the wwwoffle passifier in the baby's mouth, file deletions
> won't happen again after the first time?
> 
> mainly i am tired of having to read the 8 cd's over and over for it to
> make its fragile indexes.
> 
> Why must it delete things from /var/lib/apt/lists/ if it is unable to
> get a newer version?

By removing it from sources.list, you're telling it your not interested
in using it as a source anymore.

I'm lucky enough to have a DSL connection, so I don't completely
understand your problems. All of my apt sources are network sites (not
CDROMs) and I'm always online. My guess is that if you run apt-get
update with the cdrom sources in your sources.list it asks you to jockey
the discs to see if they've been updated, and if you run it with the
network sources in you have to wait for them to time out if you're off
line. I believe that if you leave the CDROM sources in there and never
take them out, apt is smart enough to recognize each CD and won't have
you re-read them each time you update (unless you've removed them from
sources.list so their data got thrown away). I think the answer to the
CDROM dilemma is to just leave the cdrom sources in the sources.list
always. As for the best solution to the network sources and offline
problem, I'm not sure. 

good times,
Vineet
-- 
http://www.doorstop.net/
-- 
"Computer Science is no more about computers
than astronomy is about telescopes." -E.W. Dijkstra

Attachment: pgp90Wpkh9aw6.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: