[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Supported install hardware for Sarge?



Miroslav Kure wrote:
> Well, after some cleaning of the install manual is apparent, that the
> greatest mess is in the en/install-methods/downloading-files.xml (and
> connected build/*-{images|tarballs}.ent). The mess comes from
> referencing too much installation files in the past releases.
> 
> There are basically two possibilities:
>  1. Toss the old stuff and describe installation files for each arch
>     individually. 
>       pros: Easier to maintain, no need to wory your changes affect
>             other architectures.
>       cons: Some duplicate work
>  2. Describe general, stable and valid layout of the archive
>       pros: More elegant, smaller
>       cons: If there will be more exceptions, it will turn into the
>             mess it is currently.
> 
> I'm inclined to the second scheme, but look:
> 
> i386 and powerpc both use the same archive layout, yet they have
> different kernel names: netboot/vmlinuz vs. netboot/vmlinux.
> 
> Current mips uses a bit different layout than i368/powerpc duo.  I'm
> afraid how will the archive look like after the other architectures
> join the party.
> 
> Any oppinions on the above toppic?
>
> Is it realistic to expect that eventually *all* arches will keep their
> files in the unified archive scheme and moreover that they will use
> same names?

I'm not sure about kernel naming. Some of those names may be hardcoded?

The image naming does in fact follow a logical scheme, it may be too
complex to explain to users however. See the comments at the top of
build/Makefile. I think the mips layout would be clearer if it were a
slightly deeper tree structure. Same is true for some other arches, for
example, ia64's boot.img should be cdrom/boot.img. There is no reason to
have that in the top level.

OTOH, we have to keep the mips subarches separate, which will make it
(and sparc) always look rather different than the i386 tree.

One thing that may be helpful is the MANIFEST file.

Anyway, this is not a good time to move things around for many arches,
as it has to be coordinated to avoid breaking CD building.

-- 
see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: