Benjamin Reed wrote:
> I did some investigation of the node exists errors, and I think they are
> completely bogus (at least, while I agree we shouldn't have gotten to
> that point in the code path in the first place, I believe it is entirely
> legal to ignore the error).
>
> I've done some Data::Dumper debugging, and basically I think what's
> happening is as it's going through and making the list of packages to
> investigate for dependencies, it's somehow hitting a package twice.
> When it's time to add it to the hash of things to check, it says "I
> already have this in the hash" and it bombs.
>
> The stuff that goes into the hash is generated like this:
>
> @{$deps->{$dname}}[ PKGNAME, PKGOBJ, PKGVER, OP, FLAG ] = (
> $dname, Fink::Package->package_by_name($dname),
> $dp, $OP_INSTALL, 2
> );
>
> ...by the time it comes up, there is no way this information won't
> always be identical to what's in the hash already.
Hmm, if it were identical, it wouldn't get there at all. There is an
earlier test
if (exists $deps{$dname} and $deps{$dname}->[PKGVER] == $dp) {
...
next DEPLOOP;
}
So if it's really the same version, it quits before coming to the error.
The "node exists" error comes from
if ($dp->is_installed()) {
$dname = $dp->get_name();
if (exists $deps{$dname}) {
die "Internal error: node for $dname already exists\n";
}
So it kicks in only if there is a different version already in the dep
list, and the version on the dep list that is currently examined
corresponds to the installed version. As I see it, if you simply ignore
this, you may then hand a conflict to dpkg that it cannot handle.
IIRC, years ago we used to have many more of these "node exists" errors,
and the code was fixed to remove the bogus ones. Now it is extremely
rare and chances are that if it happens, there is really something wrong
with the dependencies.
> "Fink::Package->package_by_name($dname)" interrogates the index, which
> is already up-to-date and unchanging by the time this loop is
> encountered, so at worst, we will be checking postgresql81-dev if it
> matches the dependencies multiple times.
>
> I think the "node exists" die should instead be replaced with "next".
>
> Empirical testing with a reproducible error on my dev system implies
> this is safe, as well. :)
Is this reproducible by others as well?
--
Martin
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
