John Paul Adrian Glaubitz dixit: >On 05/02/2014 10:05 PM, Helge Deller wrote: >>> This needs to be addressed on d-i side; we need better support >>> for the dpo 'unreleased' suite there. >> >> Sounds not very simple or clean. >> How did you solved that on m68k then?
Not yet. I’m not a big friend of d-i myself (but recognise its need, of course), so I’ve not done any work in that area. Some debootstrap patches exist, and IIRC Wouter has done/planned something on the d-i side, but he also stopped due to lack of time. >We didn't yet :(. You have to partition the disk manually and copy >a root filesystem onto it. Either that or debootstrap, yes. >I agree with Thorsten, this is a fundamental problem with Debian ports >that needs to be addressed, especially when you look at the stats how ACK. >Maybe this problem gets more attention within the rest of Debian when >sparc, which has recently been dropped from testing, will move to the >ports side. Since there are still many people running Debian on sparc, >there might be an incentive to solve this problem. Absolutely no: everyone who was using sparc post-etch will just change to sparc64, and people using a real sparc (as opposed to sparc64) have… other venues… open to them which are OT on this list ;-) >>The only simple way I see is then to set up an own repository (cloned >>from debian-ports), add the packages there and then instruct the >>installer to load the installation packages from there. This is at >>least how I got it to work sucessfully once. No, you don't need that. You can work with unstable+unreleased, if you just tell it to merge the Packages lists in the proper place, and if the mirror carries both. That being said: it is not, generally, possible to install (using either debootstrap or d-i) from “unstable”, even in Debian proper, due to missing dependencies, library transitions, etc. (which the dpo-minidak bug that doesn’t keep libraries around for as long as they’re used makes only worse). We need some sort of “testing”-lookalike suite, and a way for ports to opt-in to have packages from “unreleased” migrate into it. (This is for ports staying on dpo. Ports bootstrapping on dpo and intending to get into the main archive from there will, of course, need to have zero packages in “unreleased”, and as such, their “testing”-alike (I’d call it a different name though, and ideally one per arch¹) would have only packages from unstable too.) ① if for no other reason that, even when taking only from unstable, (binary) package version will differ, adding the need to track different versions of source packages too bye, //mirabilos -- 16:47⎜«mika:#grml» .oO(mira ist einfach gut....) 23:22⎜«mikap:#grml» mirabilos: und dein bootloader ist geil :) 23:29⎜«mikap:#grml» und ich finds saugeil dass ich ein bsd zum booten mit grml hab, das muss ich dann gleich mal auf usb-stick installieren -- Michael Prokop über MirOS bsd4grml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/pine.bsm.4.64l.1405022200020.22...@herc.mirbsd.org
