Re: Splitting the distribution for CDs
On Fri, 20 Mar 1998, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Is that a request to unconfigure chimera before unpacking xlib6-2
> > instead of using the unpack of chimera to clear the depends? I have no
> > issue with unconfigured packages that are broken, I have simply made a
> > big effort to minimize configured packages that are broken.
> The former. You _must_ deconfigure something if you break its
> dependencies, otherwise you violate the invariant that dependencies
> are supposed to provide.
That is what I thought, and why I implemented the ordering. I think I can
arrange for an unconfigure...
> > I will say that having a single package file with both cd's contents
> > will complicate things. I would like to have a single package file
> > per-cd. This means to start things going the user will have to pop in
> > two CD's but that is okay. The two CD bit is needed to get a unique
> > handle on the CD so it can be determined which is which..
> I want people to be able to make CDs by putting files matching one
> pattern onto one CD and other files onto the other, straight from our
> archive site - and preferably for them to be able to select the
> pattern. This means that the CDs have to have a common Packages file.
Why can't they just run dpkg-scanpackages after this is done? It is either
that or I will have to run the equivilant to determine what CD things are
on and that will be much less effecient (and more complex for me!)
Perhaps we could make dpkg-scanpackages somehow more compatible with how
you envision people making CD's? Maybe arrange for it to be given a list
of files and it will build the packages file, then that could be included.
What you are proposing does not fit well into the entire concept of
sources for the distribution and makes it much harder to sort the packages
list by CD to minimize swapping [as well as other swap minimization
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org