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

Re: Upcoming Section changes in the archive



> Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 09:07:35PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > According to my knowledge of dak, the sections are global. Which means
> > that we don't have to worry about a possible kernel update for
> > lenny+1/2. Am I correct with that?
> 
> The sections are defined in the override files [1], which are per 
> codename. Special case is current testing (i.e. squueze), for which the 
> overrides are always kept the same as sid.
> 
> I assume the proposed changes would only affect sid + squeeze, not sarge 
> and lenny.
> 
> So you probably do have to worry about lennynhalf as that will introduce 
> new packages which should go in the current sections. So either they will 
> need to have the correct "old" sections in the control file, or the FTP 
> masters will have to correct them in the overrides file for lenny during 
> NEW processing.
> 

[...]

Seeing that the change of sections could pose some technical problems (not only
challenges implementing them) as well, let me ask one (possibly stupid)
question: Why do we need sections at all?

All that policy states is that it simplifies some handling of packages. If it's
about partitioning the archive into manageable components (some algorithm
traversing each component linearly or whatever), why not just group them by
source package names, as already done in other situations?

Thanks a lot,
Michael

Attachment: pgpUR3JA3hmmh.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: