On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 07:03:11PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > || On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 21:13:13 +0000 > || Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > jb> I recall hearing something in the recent past about the byhand bits > jb> possibly going away; is this support still needed? (I think the byhand was > jb> related to dpkg, so it might only be dpkg that was dropping the byhand > jb> output...) > > The byhand section is used by the d-i tarball of images. If we include > it we can then send a package for debpool, of d-i, and it be all > installed without the need of humman intervation. > > You can check it here: > http://packages.qa.debian.org/d/debian-installer/news/1.html > > This is still used by it.
Sorry it's taken so long to come back around to this bug. Things in the
rest of life got a bit distracting, forcing most of the wishlist items (and
not just in terms of Debian bugs) off the bottom of the queue.
After further review, and some talking to folks on #debian-devel, the
concensus (though of only a handful of folks responding) was that 'byhand'
does not translate into 'unpack into this place', but rather, 'needs to be
unpacked by someone who understands what to do with it'.
Specifically, there are a number of packages that generate 'byhand' files
that do not, in fact, belong in the same basic place as the bits that come
out of a d-i byhand tarball.
As such, automatically unpacking it seems like a non-starter, at this
point. However, there are still a couple of possibilities; first, packages
which have any 'byhand' bits could be dumped, much like with the main
Debian archive, into a 'byhand' area and require further manual processing.
Alternatively, it would be possible to do something fairly similar to what
debpool does now, but slightly saner; install the package files to the
pool, but rather than putting the byhand file in the pool as well, moving
it into a byhand directory that the administrator is expected to deal with
manually.
The second option could be set up to trigger a notification hook of this
event, once hooks are supported.
Do you have any thoughts on this?
--
Joel Aelwyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ,''`.
: :' :
`. `'
`-
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
