Remco Blaakmeer wrote: > That's why I and several other people have proposed a cache database. The > text files will still be the authoritative source of information for dpkg. > But after dpkg has read them and built its database in memory (as it does > now), it can save this database to disk. The next time dpkg runs, it can > simply stat the text files and the database and then use either the text > files or the cache database, depending on which has been modified more > recently. And every time dpkg updates the database from a Packages > file, it will write not only the updated database but also the updated > text files to disk. > > If I am correct, this means that dpkg only needs to rebuild the database > from scratch if the sysadmin has edited one or more of the text files. > This could mean a much shorter startup time for dpkg.
Doesn't apt already use a cache database? Seems the code is alreaqdy written, then.. -- see shy jo I'm on a long trip, pardon any delays in my reply. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
