On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 01:19:48PM -0600, Neal McBurnett wrote:
> I use mlocate multiple times a day.
> Find is way too slow and inconvenient for finding files in a big
> set of filesystems, compared to properly configuring mlocate.
Does "properly configuring mlocate" mean you are using something other than
the default, generic config? If you are already configuring the mlocate
package on your systems, it doesn't seem onerous to also have to install the
package because it's not installed by default; do you agree?
> It also seems that the bugs should be addressed (and have in some
> cases been addressed) whether or not find is installed by default.
> Neal McBurnett http://neal.mcburnett.org/
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 11:59:57AM -0700, Brian Murray wrote:
> > The Ubuntu Foundations team was recently looking at an issue with
> > mlocate and the effect it has on all users of Ubuntu. While that
> > specific issue is fixable there are also issues[2,3] with keeping
> > PRUNEFS and PRUNEPATHS current in updatedb.conf. So we ended up
> > questioning the usefulness of installing mlocate by default on systems
> > at all. We believe that find is an adequate replacement for mlocate but
> > want to hear from you about use cases where it may not be. I'll start
> > with a personal example:
> > "I don't remember (because I need to know so infrequently) where the
> > meta-release file is cached on disk by update-manager and use locate to
> > find it. The find command itself is inadequate because the cached file
> > exists in both /home and /var."
> >  https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=880507
> >  http://launchpad.net/bugs/827841
> >  http://launchpad.net/bugs/1823518
> > Thanks,
> > --
> > Brian Murray
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/