Re: Integrating the debian-installer into the archive
On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 20:33, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 07:55:01PM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote:
> > Our (di-team) current approach is to hide^Wput the images in
> > a dot deb package and worry some later time how to make the
> > binaries available.
> It's probably a bad idea to make it a .deb.
> I'd strongly recommend you not try to get the buildds doing this until you
> can demo the scripts in a reliable way. Presumably you want to directly
> access the archive to pull down various udebs, eg, which isn't something
> you can necessarily do on buildds in a straightforward manner.
One possible solution is to upload only to _experimental_, if possible.
> Have you got the scripts working for all arches yet, or just i386? Are
> you sure that the scripts are going to work automatically, without root
> privleges, on other architectures?
The primary use of such a system, as I see it, is to actually see it
build on various archs. A very important side-effect of the build
process is info on how big the packages, and images, are getting. This
is far more important here than the rest of the archive. As a developer
I'd like to see the effect of, eg. adding more keymaps to kbd-chooser,
more languages .po files, _on_each_archive_. At the moment, I need to
log into each build machine in turn, and do builds. Having the buildd
logs available would mean we could see that e.g. we have only 10k left
on the mips floppies, etc.
Alastair McKinstry <firstname.lastname@example.org>
GPG Key fingerprint = 9E64 E714 8E08 81F9 F3DC 1020 FA8E 3790 9051 38F4
He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from
oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that
will reach to himself.
- --Thomas Paine