RE: (d-i) download improvements
> > This is a problem though, using symlinks for the downloads like this
> > rather than just updating the links essentially means that any user who
> > doesn't pay carefull attention to how things are done and has a long
> > download containing resumes (e.g. a user who has a slow and unstable
> > internet connection)will get a broken image. That seems to me to be
> > a large loss for a relatively small gain.
>
> I do know what you mean.
> And I think I have now a clue for failed installations who couldn't be
> explained. I do feel sorry for those who did a download and the next day
> again with the same outcome, because they got both times hit
> by the daily build switch.
who is responsible for http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/ which seems to be the normal way to download snapshots and how hard would it be to make that page link to the appropriate dated build directly rather than linking to the "current" symlink?
what matters if the website not pointing to the symlink, whether the symlink should be removed completely is a seperate consideration that can only really be made after the web page issue is fixed.
> > btw are we ever likely to get a proper tool for downloading images
> > in a peicewise fassion? jigdo-lite is really terrible (no progress
> > indication, unclear if its resuming or starting again etc). Bittorrent
> > is banned or highly throttled on many networks and even when it is
> > availible is only suitable for the most popular images.
>
> Point seen, in fact "Good pointsss seen".
> My advice is to split them in separate wishlist bugreports against
> the (pseudo)package[1] ftp.debian.org
i'm not sure how that package would be appropriate, one is an issue (in the first instance at least) with the D-I web page and the other is the issue that jigdo STILL hasn't been finished nor has any decent replacement for it come forward. I have filed an important bug against jigdo though.
Reply to: