[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Uninstallable Packages



On Thu, Oct 07, 1999 at 12:23:39PM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> And how many of those package are uninstallable because the i386 folk
> uploaded a binary-all version of a package and a binary-powerpc package
> depends on the exact version of it.

Heh. That's (kinda) the next project. :)

What I'd *like* to setup for a while is a completely separate unstable
derivative that is permanently consistent, and see if it's workable
or not.

The basic idea would be to only let packages into this derivative when:

	* they don't make any other packages uninstallable (unless said
	  other packages are to be removed anyway)
	* they're available for all architectures
	* they don't have any other RC bugs (or they reduce the RC bug count)

The concern I have is mainly whether it's actually possible to get all
packages compiled for all architectures (ie, if the autobuilders are fast
enough to do the compiling; and if all packages are going to actually
be installable on all architectures they claim to be).

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.

 ``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it 
        results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.''
                                        -- Linus Torvalds

Attachment: pgpY1b9sj3xFK.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: