Re: Potato packages

2001-01-05 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer 
On Friday 5 January 2001, at 11 h 21, the keyboard of Russell Coker 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Do we have a repository of packages to support such people?

http://www.internatif.org/bortzmeyer/debian/apt-sources/

Potato packages

2001-01-04 Thread Russell Coker 
Is anyone maintaining a repository of Potato packages for new features?

If you want to run ReiserFS as root then you need the LILO I just uploaded.

If you want devfsd then you need the woody version (there's no potato 
version).

My LVM packages will soon be available in woody but potato will be missing 
out.

I am sure that there are lots of people who want to use some of these 
features but who don't want to track the unstable/testing releases of Debian 
to do so.  Do we have a repository of packages to support such people?

If not can we create one?

-- 
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/   Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page

Re: Potato packages

2001-01-04 Thread Jacob Kuntz 
from the secret journal of Russell Coker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
 I am sure that there are lots of people who want to use some of these 
 features but who don't want to track the unstable/testing releases of Debian 
 to do so.  Do we have a repository of packages to support such people?
 

i believe this is why we *have* testing.

-- 
jacob kuntz
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
underworld.net/~jake

Re: Potato packages

2001-01-04 Thread Russell Coker 
On Friday 05 January 2001 12:00, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
 from the secret journal of Russell Coker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
  I am sure that there are lots of people who want to use some of these
  features but who don't want to track the unstable/testing releases of
  Debian to do so.  Do we have a repository of packages to support such
  people?

 i believe this is why we *have* testing.

No.

The problem is that these packages I named depend on more recent versions of 
libc6 than exist in potato.  Thus if you want to cleanly install these 
packages on a potato system then you need to install libc6 and several 
packages it drags in (including new nsswitch modules, new nscd, and more).

Then someone who merely wanted to install a 2.4.0 kernel and the utilities it 
requires ends up installing about 20 megs of packages from 
testing/unstable/whatever.

I am not suggesting that we do this for versions prior to potato.  I also 
think that we should stop maintaining such a potato+ repository after woody 
is released.

I am not suggesting that anything be added to auto-builders or that there 
should be a requirement for package maintainers to do anything.  We could 
make it a NMU-only repository.  Then if there's a package that's not in 
Potato that you need on a Potato system you could compile the woody source 
and upload it.

I would be happy to upload potato packages of devfsd, lilo (21.6), and 
anything else that isn't in potato that I need on potato systems.  The aim 
would be to only add new packages, or upgrade packages which provide 
functionality needed for other new features (lilo 21.6 is needed for ReiserFS 
support).

-- 
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/   Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page