Anthony Towns wrote:
> s/ source/
> source (.dsc, .tar.gz, .orig.tar.gz, .diff.gz)
> binaries (.deb)
> ubinaries (.udeb)
>
> dists/ stable/ main/
> binary-i386/
> Packages file referencing .debs
> install-i386/
> Packages file referencing .udebs
Yes, this looks about right.
Somewhere in here there has to be a directory where disk images and
stuff go. Those will be byhand files just like the boot-floppies though.
> Calling them udebs might be helpful to avoid naming conflicts in the pool.
> Probably _something_ is necessary to avoid naming conflicts in the pool
> at any rate, if not .udeb, then...?
If not udeb then a package name prefix I guess.
> Okay, then, I think this is what'll I do when you start getting d-i to
> usable. It'll mean that you won't really get to declare a "release"
> of d-i except with the actual release of Debian, there'll just be a
> pile of udebs that'll all work together, and be relatively bug free,
> just like normal .debs. I think this is a good thing. If it turns out
> more control is a good thing, we can add that to testing as we go (in the
> same way I'll probably be adding to testing during the actual release).
I can envion that we will want to be able to call a debian-installer
release so we can have a unified target to test against.
> > > Would it be possible, do people think, to have (eg) a release-notes.udeb
> > > from which a script on ftp-master automatically extracts the release notes
> > > and dumps them somewhere useful? Ditto vmlinuz, and the boot-floppies
> > > themselves?
> > The release notes should go in a regular debian package, as far as I'm
> > concerned. There is no point in using a udeb unless we want to install
> > the release notes onto the installer for some reason.
>
> Wouldn't it be useful to be able to read the release notes before/while
> you install?
Yes of course. They would be copied onto the web site.
--
see shy jo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
