So disco, 1.8.3:
at the start:
openat(AT_FDCWD, "/var/lib/dpkg/lock-frontend", O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_NOFOLLOW,
0640) = 4
fcntl(4, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC) = 0
fcntl(4, F_SETLK, {l_type=F_WRLCK, l_whence=SEEK_SET, l_start=0, l_len=0}) = 0
openat(AT_FDCWD, "/var/lib/dpkg/lock", O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_NOFOLLOW, 0640) = 5
fcntl(5, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC) = 0
fcntl(5, F_SETLK, {l_type=F_WRLCK, l_whence=SEEK_SET, l_start=0, l_len=0}) = 0
end of run:
close(5) = 0
close(4) = 0
close(3) = 0
=> we unlock in reverse as we want.
** Tags removed: verification-needed-disco
** Tags added: verification-done-disco
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1829860
Title:
APT unlocks in same order as it locks
Status in apt package in Ubuntu:
Fix Released
Status in apt source package in Xenial:
New
Status in apt source package in Bionic:
Fix Committed
Status in apt source package in Disco:
Fix Committed
Bug description:
[Impact]
APT releases the locks in the same order it acquires them, rather than
reverse order. Given that we have no waiting for locks, this is not _super_
problematic, but it might be wrong: You'd get a lock failure on dpkg's lock,
rather than lock-frontend.
[Test case]
Watch lock release with strace and see that it unlocks the right way.
[Regression potential]
Some other locking races or something?
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/1829860/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
