[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: gtk2 update on fc8 SOLVED!



On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 13:47 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> Gilboa Davara wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 13:15 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> >> Gilboa Davara wrote:
> >>> The GTK2 update might have contained a number of security updates; while
> >>> having a broken update will not cause any visible corruption, it may
> >>> leave the machine open for an attack.
> >> Do you think running "rpm -V" on the gtk2 package would be a good idea first?
> > 
> > It should... as long as RPM DB is not corrupted.
> > Being paranoid, I rather reinstall the RPM and reduce the risk.
> 
> I think I have been lucky over the years...knock on wood.  I've not found 
> myself in a situation where an "rpm -Uvh" or "rpm -ivh" has hung or my rpm 
> db became corrupted.  (I think I had a problem way back in the Red Hat 7, 
> not Fedora days....)  So, I've never seen the need to use --force.
> 
> So, one last question(s), if the rpm db is corrupted isn't it likely that 
> "rpm -V" would fail?  Would a corrupted db cause other packages to fail 
> verification.  And finally, what are the chances that you'd have an 
> incorrectly installed rpm and an rpm db that was corrupted in such a manner 
> that the verification would succeed?
> 
> As I said, I never have run into these kinds of problems....so these 
> questions have only just now popped into my head.
> 
> Thanks...
> 

As I said, the chances of hitting such a problem are rather low.
However, given the very low risk (of having RPM -Uvh --force fail), I
rather go the extra mile.

- Gilboa


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]