Hi Jeff, On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 15:58:08 -0500 Jeff Johnson <jbj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 07:02:54PM -0200, Andre Costa wrote: > > Thks a lot for the excellent explanation, Jeff =) > > > > ... but, I must say it raised yet another question: these > > instructions[http://www.rpm.org/hintskinks/repairdb/] explicitely > > refer to/var/lib/rpm/__db* as lock files, and say they have to be > > removed prior to a DB rebuild. I am probably mixing apples and > > oranges, but it seems to go against what you say below. Could you > > please calrify it a little further? > > "lock files" -- in some English sense -- is an appropriate term for > files that contain locks. > > I'm not sure what to clarify. There are 3 types of information in > __db* files: > 1) a Berkeley DB version number that makes upgrades painful. > 2) ptrs to locks that can be shared within a dbenv. > 3) a "warm cache", i.e. a lookaside cache for retrieved data. > > Go shop a better answer somewhere else if you don't believe me ... Please, let me clarify that I was not doubting you at all -- how could I doubt the man responsible for RPM? ;) The pieces of the puzzle were not connecting on my head, and I thought maybe the info on rpm.org site could be incorrect in some sense. Also, my understanding of the meaning of lock files led to the confusion (I thought that their mere existence would block apps). Please apologize for the confusion. Thks again, Andre -- Andre Oliveira da Costa _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
