Shawn Walker wrote:
> Brock Pytlik wrote:
>> Shawn Walker wrote:
>>> Danek Duvall wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 03:31:39PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This seems like something we should be able to figure out on our
>>>>> own. We should have some way of "knowing" (by an image attribute
>>>>> or a file timestamp?) that the index needs to be synchronized.
>>>> And Brock is doing precisely that. The issue is that Brock would
>>>> like for
>>>> the end-user to know that something had gone wrong, even if we were
>>>> able to
>>>> fix it successfully, on the expectation that they'll still
>>>> complain, so we
>>>> can a) figure out that it's happening at all, and b) we can have
>>>> some hope
>>>> of fixing it.
>>>>
>>>> A worthy goal, but I'd rather have it silent for now (unless it can't
>>>> update the indices in full, either, of course).
>>> I guess my point was that we shouldn't ever need to tell the user
>>> that they have to go do something like "pkg rebuild-index" -- we
>>> should do it if we need to (on reboot in this case). In this
>>> particular case, it looks like this gets back to the discussion of
>>> having an SMF service manage the search reindexing.
>>>
>> Now you've lost me. Are you talking about a different bug ("we should
>> check if the index needs fixing at boot"), or is this still this bug?
>> I agree, such a service would be nice to have, but I don't see how
>> it's relevant here.
>
> It's relevant here in the sense that the message you are printing
> indicates that the user needs to perform "pkg rebuild-index" when the
> boot into the new environment. That was solely the angle from which I
> was approaching.
>
Ah. That message is (now) if we've failed to rebuild the index from
scratch, and still applies. If things are so hosed that we can't rebuild
from scratch, we'll ask the user to try themselves, probably after
booting into a new BE. But, honestly in this case, either they're
running with the wrong permissions (in which case the install itself
should fail), or things have gone so horribly wrong I can't speculate
what would have happened. At least if they try themselves in the new BE,
we'll remove several layers of confusion from debugging the problem.
Brock
>
> My short response is, "don't worry; not this wad."
>
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
