From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 10 08:15:00 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0625A16A46B for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2007 08:15:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bushman@freebsd.org) Received: from mail.r61.net (mail.r61.net [195.208.245.249]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73F6313C455 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2007 08:14:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bushman@freebsd.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (shogun.cc.rsu.ru [195.208.252.84]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.r61.net (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l6A7kxF7098924; Tue, 10 Jul 2007 11:47:01 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from bushman@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <46933969.7050602@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 11:46:49 +0400 From: Michael Bushkov User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexander Leidinger References: <20070709104152.rsg4v3hjww8woksk@webmail.leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <20070709104152.rsg4v3hjww8woksk@webmail.leidinger.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cached update flaws... X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 08:15:00 -0000 Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Hi, > Hi Alexander, > somehow cached doesn't work as I think it should work. I have a jail in > which I use cached. There I wanted to install doxygen. As part of this > cups (dependency from qt) is build. The cups port adds a cups user and > group. After adding the group/user the configure script checks for the > user. This fails as cached doesn't know about the added user. I have to > restart cached to see the user/group (tested with "pw groupshow cups"). > > Are my expectations about cached wrong, or is it misbehaving? Your expectations are not wrong. There is a cached version in my perforce branch that has all the necessary functionality (it watches local files and flushes the cache when needed). It's in the process of commitment. I'm sorry that it takes so much time to get it committed. > > And while we are at it, is there really a need to print the cached > version number and the fact that it was developed during GSoC 2005 at > each start? It clutters the visual appearance at boot time. While I was developing cached (during GSoC 2005, as you can guess) I was extremely inspired by the GSoC program and about the people that I had a chance to meet because of this program. That's why I put that message. Actually, I'm still as inspired :) . I can delete the message, however. > > Bye, > Alexander. > -- With best regards, Michael Bushkov Southern Federal University