Am 15.09.2014 um 14:44 schrieb Richard W.M. Jones:
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 02:40:34PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 15.09.2014 um 14:28 schrieb Richard W.M. Jones:
>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 10:57:13AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>> 1) I run some application, which loads my foo.rb file.
>>> 2) I later update the package which removes bar.rb file.
>>> 3) And I call some_function which fails due to missing bar.rb
>>
>> How is this not 'foo' simply being broken? ie. Not expressing its
>> needs properly in its RPM dependencies?
>>
>> It would still have been broken even with a reboot
>
> no - why should it?
>
> 'foo' is loaded in memory, updated and now has different dependencies
> no longer require 'bar.rb' but your running version still do
Please read closely. 'foo' has *not* been updated.
If 'foo' had been updated, we would have spotted it and restarted that
process using my technique outlined in the previous email
cross deps coming in my mind
foo -> library -> library -> library
* the first maybe already loaded
* also loaded the second one in a previous call
* that version relies on teh third one for some operations
* in a update the deps have changed
so you may have a mix with different dep-chains in memory
and some parts used the first time from disk with unexpected
results