[Rpm-maint] rpm packages with empty files..

[Mark Hatle]

There is a bit that is set by the rpm package that controls various 
aspects of validation.

md5sum, attributes, size, "ghost" (if it may or may not exist), etc.

To properly validate a system, you have to pay attention to these 
attributes and ignore certain changes based on those attributes. 
(Everything is available via query flags.. you may have to look at the 
RPM sources for the actual bit values.)

rpm -Va does this today.

--Mark

Pazzo Da Legare wrote:
> Thank you Mark.
> 
> So if one wants to check the integrity of the system( = i.e. all files
> from each rpm installed package are presents) only for all f in files
> from some rpm s.t.
> 
> (f is on filesystem  &&  f has size > 0 declared in rpm) || ( f is on
> filesystem with size > 0 && f has size == 0 declared in rpm)
> 
> in other words, one should consider a ghost file for a check only if
> it has size>0 on fs ... or simply discard ghost files
> check....probably they are useful when one are going to uninstall...
> 
> Thank you again,
> 
> pazzo
> 
> 
> 
> 2008/1/11, Mark Hatle <mark.hatle at windriver.com>:
>> Those are "ghost" files.  They don't have to exist for the system to be
>> valid, but if they do exist, they are owned by the RPM package.
>>
>> These files are part of the RPM database mechanisms (actually berkleyDB).
>>
>> --Mark
>>
>> Pazzo Da Legare wrote:
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> Could you please explain why rpm packages builders are defining spec
>>> file with empty files inside?
>>> e.g. the rpm package for rpm utility defines empty files __db.000,
>>> __db.001, ...., __db.009, but I cannot find any file on my
>>> system...and rpm -Vv  seems to be happy....is it checking only not
>>> empty files?
>>>
>>> Thx
>>>
>>> pazzodalgagre
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Rpm-maint mailing list
>>> Rpm-maint at lists.rpm.org
>>> https://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
>>