Comment 10 for bug 651483
Revision history for this message
|
|
#10 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
bbfa235
(Get the code!)
On our systems we get:
EL 5.2 x86_64:
# rpm -Va | wc -l
3289
EL 5.2 i686:
# rpm -Va | wc -l
21
which makes it absolutely ridiculous. rpm was *the* tool to use for both package maintenance and sanity checking. At this point on 64bit platforms this is not the case and it's really disappointing.
in reply to Comment #11 I'd like to mention that option (b) doesn't look like a good approach unless by bogus you mean that in cases where file belongs to 2 packages one is showing 'correct' timestamp and another doesn't. Otherwise if any timestamp change is considered to be bogus I would like to disagree as it is an important piece of information and could be used for system sanity checks. MD5 sums could be forged (binary crafted in a way to yield same md5 when in fact it's different). That is not to say timestamps are not as vulnerable if not more. But timestamps provide extra piece of information.
Take this comment as another vote for "Fixing" improper behavior of "rpm -V" on x86_64 whatever that means (prelink fix or rpm fix or package re-shuffle so there's no overlapping files).