On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Xavier <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 1:15 AM, Dan McGee <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Aaron Griffin <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Xavier <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Today I got very strange results downloading packages with pacman. >>>> For example : >>>> gnome-common-2.28.0... 8,9K 112,2K/s 00:00:00 >>>> [#####################] 21167% >>>> >>>>> ls -lh /var/cache/pacman/pkg/gnome-common-2.28.0-1-any.pkg.tar.gz >>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 8,9K sept. 24 00:17 >>>> /var/cache/pacman/pkg/gnome-common-2.28.0-1-any.pkg.tar.gz >>>> >>>> /var/lib/pacman/sync/gnome-unstable/gnome-common-2.28.0-1/desc:%CSIZE% >>>> /var/lib/pacman/sync/gnome-unstable/gnome-common-2.28.0-1/desc-43 >>>> >>>> 43 bytes instead of 8900 ? wtf ? >>> >>> Hmmm repo-add problem with symlinks? The any packages are symlinks... >>> maybe it needs fixing for how it determines filesize >> >> Ding! We have a winner, the symlink size itself is 43: >> >> $ ll /srv/ftp/gnome-unstable/os/i686/gnome-common-2.28.0-1-any.pkg.tar.gz >> lrwxrwxrwx 1 jgc ftp-extra 43 2009-09-21 18:35 >> /srv/ftp/gnome-unstable/os/i686/gnome-common-2.28.0-1-any.pkg.tar.gz >> -> ../any/gnome-common-2.28.0-1-any.pkg.tar.gz >> >> Too bad you point this out the day after we release, hah. Looks like >> we need to add the -L option to the stat call in sizecmd, but let's >> talk about that on the pacman ML. >> >> For now I added -L to the repo-add script on gerolde; that will be >> blown away the next time we update though. >> >> -Dan >> >> > > Well, I was wondering why I only found this problem yesterday. > It probably has nothing to do with that csize/any problem after all. > These database errors are probably around for a while, and never > affected us, because we use libfetch url_stat.size for download > progress. > So yesterday, it was more likely libfetch/network/mirrors problem I > was having, and for some reasons, it could not get the total size or > something... I don't know.
So it's a smaller bug than we thought, but still a bug :)
