Re: Bad rpmdb, where'd this come from?

[Tom Diehl <tdiehl rogueind com>]

On Sun, 26 May 2002, Jeff Johnson wrote:

> Scary message, ain't it?

Yep!!

> Short answer:
> 	Message (and problem) is harmless, ignore.

Ok, but I am fussy and do not like error messages. :-)

> Longer answer:
> 	The last deletion from a hash page did noty mark the page dirty,
> 	causing the reference count on the page to be one smaller than
> 	it should be. Later, when a verify is run, the -1 refcount is
> 	detected, and the condition is reported.
> 
> 	There's a Berkeley DB patch to fix, dropped out when upgrading
> 	to db-4.0.14, reapplied since:
> 
> 	* Wed Feb 13 2002 Jeff Johnson <jbj@redhat.com>
> 	- reapply Berkeley DB patch #4491.
> 	
> What's a PITA, is that the condition is persistent in the database store,
> so, if you've ever used a version of rpm w/o the fix, the message will
> eventually be displayed, leading to all sorts of confusion about whether
> the problem is actually fixed or not. (Hint: the problem is fixed).

So am I understanding you correctly thinking that if I ever used a package
w/o the fix even upgrading to the latest and greatest rpm package will not
prevent the error message from displaying at some point??

If so does --rebuilddb help at all? It would seem to have cleared up the 
errors for Harry.

Just courious.

-- 
.............Tom	"Nothing would please me more than being able to 
tdiehl@rogueind.com	hire ten programmers and deluge the hobby market 
			with good software." -- Bill Gates 1976

   			We are still waiting ....