On 6 February 2011 15:55, C. Scott Ananian <[email protected]> wrote: > The benefit to version controlling even the non-OLPC packages is that > the repo contains a *complete* snapshot of all the bits that went into > a particular build. This protects against upstream reorganizing their > repos, or cleaning old packages, or changing their package manager, > etc, etc. It makes builds 100% reproducible at any point in the > future (or at least that was the point). Removing any packages from > the repo would pretty much defeat the whole purpose.
I agree. None of that changes under my proposal. No packages are removed from the system. > If disk space really is a problem, one alternative is to make release > candidate builds on a branch, and only merge released builds to > master. Then you can prune the branches with git to free up disk > space, while still ensuring that you have all the bits related to > released builds. But really -- why not more disk? [I understand > there are parts of mock which are non-ideal, but the essential "saving > all the bits" part isn't one of them. IMHO.] git has a tendency to hang during switches between branches, meaning you have to kill it then clean up the mess. I tried to do prune and gc, left it for hours and nothing seemed to happen. The repo is big and ugly, and trying to google the issues I just see people saying that git shouldn't be used for binary trees and talking about its inefficiencies. I agree with the design principles of the existing mock and don't feel like they are being changed under my proposal -- just the storage system. Thanks a lot for jumping in! Daniel _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
