Re: installer location on mirrors
On 12851 March 1977, Joey Hess wrote:
>> I don't think the installer images should be in dists/ as they are now,
>> but get their own location, installer/. For various reasons, including
>> the - wth was it added there in the first place, - currently an
>> installer update move from one suite to another means real
>> copies/moves. Why, pool/ got rid of that for our packages, why do we
>> have it for the installer? Also, its really big and doesn't belong into
>> dists/, which is more like a set of "Package indices".
> It seems like pool/main/d/debian-installer/$ARCH/$version would be a
> good place to put it. Unless having non-debs in pool would break
> something's assumptions.
Yeah, at least one dak tool does. check_archive, comparing pool/ with
what is in the database. I have no idea if anything external does so
too. Also it would introduce things into pool/ that aren't in any
"index", AKA packages/sources. Don't know what tools like
debmirror/reprepro would say about that. Though, debmirror probably just
ignores it.
> If it's in pool, then dists could just link to the right one, ie:
> dists/sid/main/installer-i386/current -> ../../../../pool/main/d/debian-installer/i386/20120508
> I think this preserves backwards compatability in a clean way that
> won't need further work later, while meeting your goals.
We can do the same thing putting it in installer/, i think.
>> wheezy -> 20120508
>> There is one drawback I see outright - we no longer have a "current"
>> link. I might miss something here, but is the current link really
>> required, if we build it up like the above?
> What if a user is installing stable and cannot remember the release code
> name? (Not hypothetical; I couldn't tell you the current release
> codename offhand.) The advantage of keeping the symlink in dists is that
> it's right there with the other files for whatever dist the user
> navigates to. Also it avoids special cases.
I wonder which special cases, but I won't object to keep the current
symlink. Compared to what we have now, thats small. :)
So to rephrase my proposal:
- dists/*/main/installer-$arch content moves to installer/$arch/
- dists/*/main/installer-$arch/current will be a symlink into
installer/$arch/, pointing to the latest for that suite
- "Updating" the installer from one version to another (like, point
release time) is a simple change of the current symlink.
- additionally we have the $release -> $version links as described in my
first mail, for people that go directly into installer/ (and can
remember the codenames :) ).
I also take it we don't need/want the main/contrib/non-free in
installer/, as our d-i will always be main/ only.
I understand it right that doing it this way (ie. current symlink stays
around), it won't break anything, so we can "just do it for all suites"?!
--
bye, Joerg
Getting out of jury duty is easy. The trick is to say you're prejudiced
against all races.
Reply to: