On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 15:33, Paul de Vrieze wrote: > On Tuesday 03 February 2004 21:06, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > > > > > I'm probably missing something, but having an rsync server set up to > > > return the stable trees seems rather silly, since those trees never > > > change (only the "updates" trees change). A tarball would seem much > > > simpler, and the appropriate tarball could be included on the livecd for > > > that release. > > > > Actually, the rsync server should check the variable VERSION (or > > whatever) and update accordingly. Maybe we could do something as simple > > Stable does not change per defenition, so a tarbal is way more efficient than > an rsync server calling home once in a while to check that indeed, nothing > changed. > > > as putting a 2004.0-release file in the /usr/portage, so when VERSION > > changes to 2004.1, they no longer match and the 2004.1 tree is rsync'd > > instead.
I guess that seems like it would work just as well. In fact, I agree that the tarball idea would be a better solution. > That can be done with tarballs just as well. However don't expect syncing a > tree to be the only thing to be done when updating. In general updating is > more involved. If you say hook off your gentoo machine for a year and then > try to update it is not at all trivial. You need to ensure that you update > things in the right order, and sometimes even need to apply some force. We > can find out that order in advance to make it easy for users, but don't > pretend it is trivial. I didn't mean to make it sound trivial. I know it would not be. I was just trying to make it simpler for the sake of discussion at this time. -- Chris Gianelloni Developer, Gentoo Linux Games Team Is your power animal a pengiun?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
