Re: Bug#93612: Support for new archive structure
On Fri, 13 Apr 2001, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > It works because you got lucky, you had a CD that was fortunately
> > constructed properly. It is not supported, and if it does not work, I
> > totally don't care.
>
> Of course, the CDs are constructed properly ! I'm in charge of maintaining
> debian-cd so that it builds "properly constructed" CDs ...
> I don't see why I need to change it to something where CDs are no more
> properly constructed !
Because no matter what you do your CD will be invalid in some form, and
using a verbatim Packages file is the least pain.
> /me grumbles :
> I'm really beginning to think that the only valid alternative is
> to have a Release file and its signature for each CD.
Absolutely not.
> The Release file has been introduced after Packages file, and they should
> have been thought of a bit more to avoid those problems.
This was fully realized when we constructed the file and accepted as a
necessary evil.
> instead of Packages for checking the validity. You can make it specific
> for cdrom BTW, I don't see the need for that for any other access method.
Did you miss me mentioning that *still* breaks using file:/../ on CD's so
why bother?
> > Or if you ask particularly nice I might extend the sources.list syntax so
> > you can tell it to read Packages.cd directly
> I don't want that, it's a hack. :)
No more than all the other ugly things that have been suggested, and this
only affects the 3 people silly enough to loopback mount ISO's and try to
use APT on them.
Jason
Reply to: