Re: [again] basedebs.tgz: Supported or not?
Colin Walters <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> I don't think we need to regenerate the basedebs.tgz at every build
> of b-f, especially now that base is frozen. As far as I understand
> things, the basedebs.tgz is essentially independent of b-f. It's
> just a snapshot of woody at a particular time.
Right. I was thinking it should be generated (and not by default) by
building debootstrap a special way, with ByHand entries and a
changelog and all that. I talked to AJ about that, he provisionally
ok'd but he should get approval or at least asked about any such
changes (being also an archive maintainer).
I belive you want to split it into 1.44M disk images as well.
It should be pretty trivial to do this but you'll may want to assume
the debootstrap is already installed ... ?
> I guess what we will have to do is generate it occasionally and dump
> it in the current/ directory of disks-$ARCH on the mirrors.
Well, let's have it be uploadable and let the archive maintainers
decide where to put it.
> It kind of sucks to add a large tarball to the mirrors of what is
> essentially just the .debs they are already mirroring, plus a little
> extra data, but I don't see a way around it.
Well, just for the benefit of the CD folks, if they are planning to
provide the disk images on the CD. Doing that was the consensus we
arrived at -- e.g., for someone who has a CD and floppy at one
computer but only a floppy and no network at another.
Is anyone volunteering to work on this? If not, I'll try to get to it
next week (but I'd rather have the time to work on bad boot-floppies
...Adam Di Carlo..<email@example.com>...<URL:http://www.onshored.com/>