Consens for `Filename: ' in Packages file?
Hello,
as maintaining the non-us ftp server and while trying to create an
alternat debian-cd script I'm wondering about a consens regarding
the Filename: header in the Packages file.
In stable/binary-i386/Packages I found:
stable/binary-i386/x11/9fonts_1-4.deb
as similar (_similar) in unstable/binary-i368/Packages:
dists/unstable/main/binary-i386/text/2utf_1.01.deb
... here we have `dists' prepended :-/
and in non-US/bo/binary-i386/Packages:
bo/binary-i386/cfs_1.3.3-1.deb
I feel, we should find a somewhat more intuitive approach. And we
should know what the various install programs are expecting here ...
IMHO the Filename: header should start with the architecture element, as
nobody knows if bo is the mount point for e.g. the non-us archive.
For short:
. as in hamm, the link binary -> binary-i386 should disappear for
non-US too.
. the Packages-File should be located in the binary-<arch> directory
. the Filename: header in the packages file should start with the
directory the package is located in
Any opinions?
Heiko
--
email : heiko@lotte.sax.de heiko@debian.org heiko@sax.de
pgp : A1 7D F6 7B 69 73 48 35 E1 DE 21 A7 A8 9A 77 92
finger: heiko@sax.sax.de heiko@master.debian.org
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: