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

Re: security update url's

Quoting Darren Benham (gecko@benham.net):
> I decided not to track proposed-updates because, supposedly, the changed 
> package will soon be moved into the "real" location.  If you put a link to
> proposed-updates, you'd have to watch it for the package move and then update
> the page(s) accordingly.  This way, the page will be valid, if not at first,
> for the longer period of time w/o have a truly broken link.  Not the best
> option but the least likely to foobar the pages in the long run.

From experience, I'd say it could be months before the packages move
into stable. (No packages have moved from proposed-updates to stable
since september; I don't think having a broken link for months on a
security page is acceptible.) Until I think of something better, I'm
going to put in hard links. 

> > 2. fixes_link allows you to put All into the architecture field, but the
> > Packages area seems to assume i386 (and I don't see a way to select a
> > different arch.) Am I missing something?
> Just put the arch name...?  I don't think it's used in the url and I don't
> think the packages have pages in the Packages part of the site.

I'm not sure what you mean here. As an example, go to
http://www.debian.org/security/1998/19980922 and follow the link at the
bottom of the page to get a copy of tcsh. Click the download button on
that page and you get a list of sites where you can download the i386
.debs--but the m68k debs are nowhere to be found.

Mike Stone

Attachment: pgph2EBnC9Byt.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: