Bug 217350

Summary:	qcheck -a output differs
Product:	Portage Development	Reporter:	Roger <rogerx.oss>
Component:	Tools	Assignee:	Portage Tools Team <tools-portage>
Status:	RESOLVED WONTFIX
Severity:	normal
Priority:	High
Version:	unspecified
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Package list:		Runtime testing required:	---

Description Roger 2008-04-12 01:25:55 UTC

I'm noticing a bug in qcheck (portage-utils) where the output from specifying "-all" will differ when specifying a specific package name:

ie:

# qcheck --all

--- snip ---
Checking net-fs/nfs-utils-1.1.1 ...
 MD5-DIGEST: /etc/conf.d/nfs
 MTIME: /etc/init.d/nfs
 MTIME: /etc/init.d/rpc.idmapd
 MTIME: /etc/init.d/rpc.statd
 MTIME: /etc/init.d/rpc.gssd
 MTIME: /etc/init.d/nfsmount
  * 83 out of 89 files are good
--- snip ---


$ qcheck nfs-utils
Checking net-fs/nfs-utils-1.1.1 ...
 MD5-DIGEST: /etc/conf.d/nfs
 MTIME: /etc/init.d/nfs
 MTIME: /etc/init.d/rpc.idmapd
 MTIME: /etc/init.d/rpc.statd
 MTIME: /etc/init.d/rpc.gssd
 MTIME: /etc/init.d/nfsmount
 PERM  600: /usr/lib/nfs/state
 PERM 4511: /sbin/mount.nfs
  * 81 out of 89 files are good (Unable to digest 2 files)


Reproducible: Sometimes

Steps to Reproduce:
Difficult to reproduce.

Initially saw this with linux-headers with MD5SUMS file error, but couldn't verify within erased terminal buffer. :-/  



I'm guessing, qcheck.c is calling a different subroutine/function for "qcheck --all" vs. "qcheck <pkgname>"

Comment 1 Roger 2008-04-12 01:39:38 UTC

Never mind, I get this specific PERMS notification when running as user:

$ qcheck nfs-utils 

Running this as root is just fine. :-/

Running this as root vs user might be causing some different output else where too.

Marking as WONTFIX for now as this might be normal activity.

Comment 2 SpanKY gentoo-dev

2008-04-13 23:00:17 UTC

you should get the same set of failures when run as non-root

was it just a matter of you ran "--all" as root ?

Comment 3 Roger 2008-04-14 01:56:12 UTC

<shrugs> Seems like it.

Qcheck should be run as root anyways if you want it to have access to package files marked as root readonly.  Hence, the reason I just closed my bug here.


(I'll be working with qcheck on a couple of other boxes, if anything else happens, I have access to SVN qcheck.c from  anoncvs.gentoo.org and can further track things down.)