< said:
> I assume that you're using official packages and don't have a locally
> compiled Python interpreter or anything like that?
We build our own package repositories.
> Could you perhaps turn on auditing in order to find out what's touching
> these files?
Maybe. It will probably take a wh
Peter Jeremy writes:
> If Python isn't going to use the .pyc files we ship (because it thinks
> they are out of date), we might as well not ship them.
It usually does. There is something strange going on there, and we
don't have enough information (yet) to figure out what.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Sm
Garrett Wollman writes:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
> > These are Pyhon bytecode files. They are automatically regenerated if
> > you have write access to them and Python thinks they are stale when it
> > tries to load them. Apparently, Python's definition of "stale" is
> > slightly more compl
On 2015-Jan-24 22:03:23 -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote:
>< said:
>> These are Pyhon bytecode files. They are automatically regenerated if
>> you have write access to them and Python thinks they are stale when it
>> tries to load them. Apparently, Python's definition of "stale" is
>> slightly more c
< said:
> Garrett Wollman writes:
>> Checking for packages with mismatched checksums:
>> p5-XML-SAX-0.99_2: /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/XML/SAX/ParserDetails.ini
> This file is updated whenever you install or remove a SAX parser, so
> this is expected. There are at least half a dozen differe
Garrett Wollman writes:
> Checking for packages with mismatched checksums:
> p5-XML-SAX-0.99_2: /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/XML/SAX/ParserDetails.ini
This file is updated whenever you install or remove a SAX parser, so
this is expected. There are at least half a dozen different Perl SAX
imple
I wonder if your computer's clock is off by a lot. Python might insist on
rebuilding .pyc files if their timestamps are in the future.
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Brian Reichert
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 11:59:12AM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> > On some of my machines, I've been
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 11:59:12AM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> On some of my machines, I've been noticing the following in the
> nightly security mail:
The *.pyc are blobs of byte code that Python generates if the
interpreter chooses to compile a module.
Maybe the package erroneously contains
Maybe hardware going bad?
If you're using ZFS, it's probably not the hard disk since ZFS would
correct it before pkg can notice it. (Unless you have no redundancy, but
then you'd still see checksum errors in zpool status)
Maybe bad memory that causes corruption?
Kind Regards,
Robert Sevat
On 01
On some of my machines, I've been noticing the following in the
nightly security mail:
Checking for packages with mismatched checksums:
p5-XML-SAX-0.99_2: /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/XML/SAX/ParserDetails.ini
python27-2.7.9: /usr/local/lib/python2.7/UserDict.pyc
python27-2.7.9: /usr/local/lib/p
10 matches
Mail list logo
