Repository structure

Old stuff that should not bother anyone anymore
User avatar
gapan
Salix Wizard
Posts: 5531
Joined: 6. Jun 2009, 17:40

Repository structure

Post by gapan » 14. Jun 2009, 19:59

I've noticed that our repository current is organized like this:

i486/ISOs/current
i486/packages/current
i486/sources/current

I'am proposing to have it the other way round, like

i486/current/ISOs
i486/current/packages
i486/current/sources

That way, when a new version is out, we only have to do cp -a current $newver, as it is, we need to do it three times.
Image
Image

User avatar
thenktor
Salix Wizard
Posts: 2426
Joined: 6. Jun 2009, 14:47
Location: Franconia
Contact:

Re: Repository structure

Post by thenktor » 14. Jun 2009, 20:59

In package manager:
i486/ISOs/current
i486/packages/current
i486/sources/current

looks better (version information at the end).

a simple script can do the copying:
for XYZ in ISOs packages sources; do
cp - $XYZ/current $XYZ/$newversion
done

;)
Image
burnCDDA (burns audio CDs)
geBIERt (German beer blog)

User avatar
gapan
Salix Wizard
Posts: 5531
Joined: 6. Jun 2009, 17:40

Re: Repository structure

Post by gapan » 14. Jun 2009, 21:01

But the package manager only cares about the packages part, it's never going to care about the sources and ISOs part. Plus, it's easier to navigate from packages to sources (one up, one down).
Image
Image

User avatar
Akuna
Salix Wizard
Posts: 1038
Joined: 14. Jun 2009, 12:25

Re: Repository structure

Post by Akuna » 15. Jun 2009, 07:18

I noticed on the repo that the description of some files still refer to Zenwalk...

Also in the under title, it says that 'our' distro is based on Slackware & Zenwalk.

Although most folks here, so far, come from Zenwalk Land, does any substantial code actually come from Zenwalk?

Just curious. :)
Image
What really matters is where you are going, not where you come from.

User avatar
gapan
Salix Wizard
Posts: 5531
Joined: 6. Jun 2009, 17:40

Re: Repository structure

Post by gapan » 15. Jun 2009, 08:05

No, I don't think so, not yet at least. Though we could definitely use the systemtools part at least I think.
Image
Image

User avatar
gapan
Salix Wizard
Posts: 5531
Joined: 6. Jun 2009, 17:40

Re: Repository structure

Post by gapan » 15. Jun 2009, 10:36

One more thing the i486/current/packages structure is better: we can create a FILELIST.TXT file (as in slackware). It's easy to see the entire contents of the repository of a given version this way, packages, sources everything. Also that's the way all slackware repos are :D
Image
Image

User avatar
thenktor
Salix Wizard
Posts: 2426
Joined: 6. Jun 2009, 14:47
Location: Franconia
Contact:

Re: Repository structure

Post by thenktor » 15. Jun 2009, 11:25

Then feel free to change it, no problem for me ;)
Image
burnCDDA (burns audio CDs)
geBIERt (German beer blog)

User avatar
thenktor
Salix Wizard
Posts: 2426
Joined: 6. Jun 2009, 14:47
Location: Franconia
Contact:

Re: Repository structure

Post by thenktor » 16. Jun 2009, 01:02

I've changed the structure. Created category dirs in the sources dir as well.
Image
burnCDDA (burns audio CDs)
geBIERt (German beer blog)

User avatar
gapan
Salix Wizard
Posts: 5531
Joined: 6. Jun 2009, 17:40

Re: Repository structure

Post by gapan » 16. Jun 2009, 04:53

thenktor wrote:I've changed the structure. Created category dirs in the sources dir as well.
Good! :)

We should be a bit careful with the category dirs in the sources dir (although I like the idea a lot): if we move packages to another category in the package repo, they should also be moved in the sources repo. The problem is a lot less annoying here than in Zenwalk because we don't have the iso/extra separation. The source repo in Zenwalk has the same packages all over the place and is really unmaintained.
Image
Image

User avatar
JRD
Salix Warrior
Posts: 949
Joined: 7. Jun 2009, 22:52
Location: Lyon, France

Re: Repository structure

Post by JRD » 16. Jun 2009, 08:41

Hi Akuna :)

I've done the structure that way because I think like this :
Hey, I want this distro, so ok, what archi I have ? mmm i486 ok. Then, what do I want ? (and ISO, a package repository ?). Then, hum which version ? ok this one.

This was the reason for the order. But I'm ok with the change.

About Zenwalk description for files, it's just that I forget to change it (copied from Zenwalk mirror).
For about the "based on Slackware and Zenwalk" I don't think it is false. We use SLKBUILD which are based on ZENBUILD, and I'm sure we will use others things later. Why reinvent the wheel, and why don't take some good tools (zpm, zendo, zenpanel, ...)
Image

Locked