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

Re: New Markets



On Sun, 21 Apr 1996, Brian C. White wrote:

> > > What we will do when it is time for the release is to tar
> > > the unstable directory and extract it into a code-named
> > > directory. Then, once the mirrors have a chance to catch up, we
> > > will set a debian-1.1 symbolic link to point at the code-named
> > > directory.
> >
> > Great.  So i can look forward to downloading another copy of the
> > 157mb of the same stuff i've already spent a few days downloading.
> > Too bad if I want to use my PPP link for anything else while it's
> > happening.
>
> I think "mv unstable <new-name>" would be a much better solution to
> try.

If i'm lucky enough to issue this mv command at the right time.  Too
soon, and mirror blows away the directory, too late and there's no point
as mirror is already at work doing the job.

I'm planning to watch out for the announcement that 1.1 is about to be
released, temporarily disable the cron job for a few days, manually
mv "unstable" to "debian-1.1", and then restart the cron job.  If I'm
lucky that'll work.  It's very likely, though, that I'll be too busy or
something to actually do this when it happens.

This is basically unavoidable for 1.1...it's too late for anything but
lucky manual intervention to save.  I'm resigned to that.  I just dont
want the same thing to happen next time.

I'm glad I'm not paying by the hour or by volume for my net connection.

> > The only way to avoid having all the mirror sites having to waste
> > bandwidth downloading stuff they already have is to NOT change the
> > directory name.
>
> That's what the code-name idea is for.

How's that going to work?

I don't suppose it'll make much difference for 1.1, but if done properly it
could work for 1.2 & beyond.

e.g. give 1.2 a code name, say "fred".  make a fred/ directory, and unstable
is a sym link to it.  when 1.2 is released, make a sym link from debian-1.2
to fred/, and come up with a code name for 1.3 and repeat the process.

Is that what's planned?

Craig


Reply to: