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

Sources vs Packages files


I always thought there is a one-to-one correspondence between Sources and
Packages files.

Now I notice that udebs are in a distinct distribution area
(debian-installer), so there are two Packages fiels related to the main
Sources file.

Why is there no seperate source archive for the debian-installer packages?
Or, alternativley, simply a section in the main archive.

The current setup lacks consistency, as now there is main/binary-i386/Packages
and debian-installer/binary-i386/Packages, both related to source/Sources.
Previously, I knew I had to get dists/DIST/source/Sources and
dists/DIST/binary-ARCH/Packages and had all the information I need about the

One needs to look for sub directories of unknown name with even more
binary packages now. It would be better to have a reliable scheme that can
easily be automated. The previous setup was such a scheme, but it has been
broken now by something which seems to be an arbitrary convenience hack.

It was probably easy enough to add to the current ftp administration code,
but it requires changes in autobuilders and other tools, which would
otherwise not be necessary.

There is probably an argument that this way the installer is coupled to the
released distribuion, but I don't think it is necessary or even appropriate.
The installer seems to be distinct enough from any release (it has a
development cycle of its own).


`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org brinkmd@debian.org
Marcus Brinkmann              GNU    http://www.gnu.org    marcus@gnu.org

Reply to: