WANTED: Tool to verify installed package/port consistancy

[Matthew Seaman]

On 10/05/2013 21:04, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
> Anyway, at the moment, and for me at least, my results remain entirely
> perplexing.  I cannot imagine what might possibly be the explanation for
> the results attached below.  If anyone can offer a theory, I'm all ears.
> Meanwhile, I'll be cleaning up my script a little bit and then, in short
> order I hope, posting it here so that others can perhaps give it a try and
> tell me if their results from it are at all similar to mine.

I'd very much like to see results from a pkgng system with an equivalent
number and types of packages and that has been maintained for a similar
amount of time.  But I think that's impossible: Ronald's machine almost
certainly predates the availability of pkgng.

Obviously the script would have to be modified, as you'll need to do a
DB query to get all the checksums, rather than reading +CONTENTS files.
 Plus this shouldn't be a system that was converted to pkgng but that
has used pkgng from the start.

One of the big drivers for switching to using sqlite in pkgng rather
than a collection of files is that it does give better protection
against accidental corruption of package meta-data during normal package
updates.

	Cheers,

	Matthew

-- 
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 268 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/attachments/20130511/17c24b5e/attachment.sig>