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

Re: Updating scanners and filters in Debian stable (3.1)



Hello

On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 08:27:38PM +0200, Tilman Koschnick wrote:
> Martin Schulze wrote:
> >Have you thought about keeping these packages out of sarge or did 
> >you
> >develop a solution so that users can get their databases updated
> >outside of the stable Debian release?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> what about having an own section for packages like that, next to 
> main, contrib, non-free? There should be a clear policy of what kind 
> of packages can go in there, and what kind of stuff can change 
> during an upgrade. And there should be someone watching over it, 
> like you do with stable point releases, or the security team does 
> with security updates, who would make sure that the upgrades comply 
> with the policy. For example, changes could be limited to rules 
> files, pattern updates etc., but exclude any binaries (don't know 
> how virus engine updates fit into the picture, though). Packages 
> should be architecture-independent to ease testing.
> 
> This way, people can choose whether to have this section in their 
> sources.list or not. No other packages should depend on these 
> packages, so that if they break, nothing else is affected. Take a 
> virus scanner, for example: the main binaries, configuration files 
> etc. could live in main; the virus definitions in the extra section.
> 
> This mechanism would allow packages with fast moving content to 
> still live within the official debian infrastructure, and the policy 
> would let people know what to expect from packages in this section. 
> This has a clear advantage over maintaining them outside of the 
> official infrastructure, e.g. via backports.org. On the other hand, 
> stable point release policy doesn't need to be softened up to allow 
> fast moving packages in (packages that are moving faster than the 
> point releases anyway).
> 
> I don't know the internals of the debian infrastructure very well, 
> so I have no idea how difficult it would be to set up an extra 
> section. But I'm sure people will let me know if it's not realistic 
> :-)

We probably need a new major section as packages with this kind
of information may be in main, non-US, non-free or contrib. It is
quite easy to set up a simple such thing but I do not know how hard
it is to really integrate it into the autobuilders etc.

Regards,

// Ola

> Cheers, Til
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact 
> listmaster@lists.debian.org
> 
> 

-- 
 --------------------- Ola Lundqvist ---------------------------
/  opal@debian.org                     Annebergsslingan 37      \
|  opal@lysator.liu.se                 654 65 KARLSTAD          |
|  +46 (0)54-10 14 30                  +46 (0)70-332 1551       |
|  http://www.opal.dhs.org             UIN/icq: 4912500         |
\  gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36  4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 /
 ---------------------------------------------------------------



Reply to: