On 16-Oct-1998, Heiko Schlittermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 1998 at 02:39:38PM +1000, Tyson Dowd wrote:
> :
> : There is no reason why the X-Media field has to be in the Packages
> : files on the CD -- that information could be stored by the multi-cd
> : method when it reads in the CD info.
>
> ... but not, if the first CD contains all packages files (as our
> datom/schlittermann hamm-CDs do already ... )
Not true. There just needs to be an association between packages
file and CD label.
A file in each directory that says which CD the packages are on
would be sufficient.
E.g.
/.packages/non-free/Packages.gz
/.packages/non-free/media (contains "CD 2")
/.packages/main/Packages.gz
/.packages/main/media (contains "CD 1")
Or something like that.
>
> The multi-cd approach is fairly well tested by (I think) the most of our
> customers. I know, that the current implementation is a rather bad
> hack, but due to limited time and since _nobody_ seemed to be able to
> solve this when hamm appeared, I've implemented is myself ...
>
> Yes, there are some drawbacks that should be solved, but probably not
> for slink ...
Sure. You've done the work, and it will be fine for this release,
but it's worth discussing ways we can improve on it in future.
The basic scheme is fine, it's just the X-Media can be put elsewhere,
which means the same pacakges files can be used everywhere.
It would be *less* work to actually leave dpkg-scanpackages as it
is, and just add this change to the multi-cd method. But *more*
work has already been done, so it isn't necessarily worth changing
now.
--
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin
Tyson Dowd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://tyse.net
