Hello,
On sekmadienis 10 Spalis 2010 15:21:47 Guillem Jover wrote:
Anyway, I actually had the changes around last July, and I'll run them
through the release team to see what they say. I've rebased them now,
and will polish them a bit, but they are essentially these:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 22:20:31 +0300, Modestas Vainius wrote:
Btw, how will I be able to enable --force-unsafe-io for dpkg when it's run
under apt/aptitude? Maybe environment variable and/or /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg
option is a better solution then?
-o DPkg::options=--force-unsafe-io?
Cheers,
Hello,
On trečiadienis 20 Spalis 2010 22:33:34 Julien Cristau wrote:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 22:20:31 +0300, Modestas Vainius wrote:
Btw, how will I be able to enable --force-unsafe-io for dpkg when it's
run under apt/aptitude? Maybe environment variable and/or
/etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg option is
Hi,
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Modestas Vainius wrote:
On trečiadienis 20 Spalis 2010 22:33:34 Julien Cristau wrote:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 22:20:31 +0300, Modestas Vainius wrote:
Btw, how will I be able to enable --force-unsafe-io for dpkg when it's
run under apt/aptitude? Maybe environment
Hello,
On trečiadienis 20 Spalis 2010 23:08:36 Raphael Hertzog wrote:
It does but it's “-o DPkg::options::=--force-unsafe-io”.
Indeed, this syntax works. Thanks.
And /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg can be used to enable any command-line parameter
so you should be able to put force-unsafe-io in that file
Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org writes:
3) dpkg is pointlessly slow in such use cases as buildds where *sync() is
not
important at all.
Well, even if the buildd chroot supposedly should be able to be recreated
easily, if the zero-lenght file issues appear on it, then it might not
be
Hi!
On Sun, 2010-10-10 at 12:37:27 +0300, Modestas Vainius wrote:
On sekmadienis 10 Spalis 2010 01:06:41 Otavio Salvador wrote:
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Modestas Vainius mo...@debian.org wrote:
It does not make much sense for dpkg to be in this uber-paranoid mode at
7 matches
Mail list logo
