Re: CVS updated
In message <19981127184323.A25998@molec3.@> you wrote:
>I don't have strong feelings one way or the other, I just follow common
>practice here. I prefer having working sources at the CVS repository, but
>may as well commit more frequently, even non-working-yet code if that's
>what's preferred. What do others think?
Well, I can see that the way you are doing it is reasonable, now...
>On Fri, Nov 27, 1998 at 01:10:33PM -0500, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
>> Speaking of testing, what's the easiest way to collect the packages I
>> need locally to test the system? Keep in mind I only have a 28.8
>> connection. I was considering running collection part of the make
>> process on master.debian.org, and then taking the contents of the
>> update area and putting them somewhere on my local box.
>That's not enough, as the update area contains only files that are in
>Incoming but not yet on the FTP archive. That means it's usually empty,
>or contains just the tecra kernel (for i386 sets).
>Having a local mirror of the base section is 90% of what's needed. There
>may be some packages that are not in base, so you may have to check
>scripts/rootdisk/EXTRACT_LIST_* and scripts/basedisk/PACKAGES_* for the
Thanks, I'll check it out. Maybe I'll add a note to the top level
README about all this. I was hoping there was a way for me to
do a partial build on an archive server (i.e., master), and then
pull down just the .debs I need. Hmm. Guess not?
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>