quality of the cd images we are offering
Hi!
Yesterday I downloaded some cd images from ftp.fsn.hu, aka
ftp.hu.debian.org, as everybody is mirroring their images I was supposing
that they were offering good quality cd images of debian, being ourselfs
also making unoficial cd images I like to know what the others are up to,
wich scripts to use, ...
One of the thing I'm concerned about is the 2.2r3 images having to be done
in a while and the scripts not being ready.
Anyway, after downloading the debian images last night (sorry for that
bandwith) O:-) I started testing them today, this is what I found:
First of all I want to look at the woody images, I only downloaded the
first cd of the bunch. They are from the 9th of march I supposed they should
be the better ones, also I'm sure they are one of the most wanted, with the
sid ones, of course (people seems to like kde2).
This is what I have found:
pule:/download# mount woody-i386-1.raw /cdrom -o loop
pule:/download# cd /cdrom/
pule:/cdrom# find . -name Packages -exec grep '^Package: ' {} \;|wc -l
984
pule:/cdrom# find . -type f -name '*.deb'|wc -l
990
Maybe my procedure is not the correct one, but it seems to me that some of
the debian packages, 6 on this cd, don't know about the others, are not
being offered to an apt done against this cd.
Then I looked at the extra cds for potato, a really wanted stuff, at least
the people ask for them and seem to like the stuff being offered, not only
the non-free stuff but also those updates and things that weren't on the
potato oficial images.
Well, this is what I have found on cd 1:
pule:/download# mount potato-i386-extra1.raw /cdrom -o loop
pule:/download# cd /cdrom/
pule:/cdrom# find . -name Packages
./dists/potato/contrib/binary-i386/Packages
./dists/potato/main/binary-i386/Packages
./dists/potato/non-free/binary-i386/Packages
./dists/potato/non-US/contrib/binary-i386/Packages
./dists/potato/non-US/main/binary-i386/Packages
./dists/potato/non-US/non-free/binary-i386/Packages
./updates/contrib/binary-i386/Packages
./updates/main/binary-i386/Packages
./updates/non-free/binary-i386/Packages
pule:/cdrom# find . -name Packages -exec grep '^Package: ' {} \;|wc -l
587
pule:/cdrom# find . -name Packages.gz -exec zgrep '^Package: ' {} \;|wc -l
771
pule:/cdrom# find . -type f -name '*.deb'|wc -l
844
pule:/cdrom/dists/potato/main/binary-i386# ls -l Packages*
-r--r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 11 15:57 Packages
-r--r--r-- 1 root root 3243575 Feb 11 15:57 Packages.cd
-r--r--r-- 1 root root 869431 Feb 11 15:57 Packages.cd.gz
-r--r--r-- 1 root root 20 Feb 11 15:57 Packages.gz
As you can see not only a lot of the packages are not ofered to apt, but
Packages and Packages.gz differ a lot on their contents, also you can see
that some of the Packages files are empty.
About cd 2... almost the same.
pule:/download# mount potato-i386-extra2.raw /cdrom -o loop
pule:/download# cd /cdrom
pule:/cdrom# find . -name Packages*
./kde/beta/binary-i386/Packages.gz
./kde/crypto/binary-i386/Packages.gz
./kde/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz
./kde/optional/binary-i386/Packages.gz
./kde/qt1apps/binary-i386/Packages.gz
pule:/cdrom# find . -name Packages* -exec zgrep '^Package: ' {} \;|wc -l
557
pule:/cdrom# find . -type f -name '*.deb'|wc -l
720
Well, I know all this cds are unofficial stuff, and woody is testing distro
and all that, but I think we should look a little more at what we are
offering to the people that is gonna download and probably burn this cds.
Well, this is not the fault of the guy(s) in charge of fsn.hu of course, I
allways rush to them when I want to find the last image of almost any
distro, they do a good job, as far as I know because I have written a couple
of times with Attila Nagy, they allways try to use latest cvs versions and
all that.
I'm not saying this is Raphael's fault either, not the fault of anybody, but
the fact is that our debian-cd scripts still don't work too well with the
new ftp structures, I have said this before on the list, in fact I'm using
my own version of the scripts wich allow me to offer all the packages to
apt, even though as I have spoken with Raphael, I'm using some dirty stuff
to do it, and they most surelly have other bugs.
The thing is that this weekend we have a bugsquash party on irc on channel
#debian-bugs at irc.debian.org (openprojects network) and I think we could
finish up those scripts, I'm gonna be arround, and Raphael (buxy) was
arround last time, so maybe we can help him a little bit with some tests or
whatever, it would be good to have this finished at last.
This are just my thoughts, of course you may disagree with them, I may be
wrong, ... just thought it was good to put them here.
Regards...
--
Manty/BestiaTester -> http://manty.net
Reply to: