Re: Potato packages
On Friday 05 January 2001 12:00, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
> from the secret journal of Russell Coker (russell@coker.com.au):
> > I am sure that there are lots of people who want to use some of these
> > features but who don't want to track the unstable/testing releases of
> > Debian to do so. Do we have a repository of packages to support such
> > people?
>
> i believe this is why we *have* testing.
No.
The problem is that these packages I named depend on more recent versions of
libc6 than exist in potato. Thus if you want to cleanly install these
packages on a potato system then you need to install libc6 and several
packages it drags in (including new nsswitch modules, new nscd, and more).
Then someone who merely wanted to install a 2.4.0 kernel and the utilities it
requires ends up installing about 20 megs of packages from
testing/unstable/whatever.
I am not suggesting that we do this for versions prior to potato. I also
think that we should stop maintaining such a potato+ repository after woody
is released.
I am not suggesting that anything be added to auto-builders or that there
should be a requirement for package maintainers to do anything. We could
make it a NMU-only repository. Then if there's a package that's not in
Potato that you need on a Potato system you could compile the woody source
and upload it.
I would be happy to upload potato packages of devfsd, lilo (21.6), and
anything else that isn't in potato that I need on potato systems. The aim
would be to only add new packages, or upgrade packages which provide
functionality needed for other new features (lilo 21.6 is needed for ReiserFS
support).
--
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Reply to: