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

Re: post-release package update policy

>On Sat, 21 Oct 1995, Steve Byrne wrote:
>> While this organization may sound complicated, it's relatively simple:
>> debian/
>>    debian-0.93R6/
>>              binary/
>>              msdos/
>>              source/
>>     	    	     {etc}
>>    stable -> debian-0.93R6
>>    latest/
>>           binary/
>>     	    	     ...
>>              net/
>>                  ppp-2.2.deb -> ../../../stable/binary/net/ppp-2.2.deb
>>              ...
>>           msdos/
>>           source/
>>           {etc}
>Put another vote for me in favor of this one.  Although, as someone else 
>suggested, hard links might be a cleaner way of doing this.  Is there any 
>disadvantage to using hard links?

I'll add another vote for it!  Keep the initial "debian-" out of the
directory name if possible.  It's already under "/debian".  Anything
more is redundant.

One problem with hard links is that most mirror programs cannot handle
them properly.  Thus, mirror sites would end up fetching every package
twice and using twice the disk space.

                                 ( bcwhite@bnr.ca )

    In theory, theory and practice are the same.  In practice, they're not.

Reply to: