Subject: buzz-fixed - it is essential; how do we make it ?

From: Ian Jackson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 96 01:56 BST

I'm absolutely convinced that we need a `buzz-fixed' directory, to
which Debian-1.1.<patchlevel> and stable are made to point.

I propose that we organise this as follows:

* Packages that need to go into buzz-fixed have in the dchanges
file `Distribution: unstable buzz-fixed' or perhaps just
`Distribution: buzz-fixed' (if the unstable tree has moved on).

* A cron job runs daily (well, out of cron.daily or scanpackages,
which can be called after upload processing as well) which

(a) Checks the buzz-fixes Packages file against the buzz one, and
generates a new Packages file which is `what should be in buzz-fixes'.

(b) If this is the same as what is in buzz-fixed it stops here.

(c) Otherwise, makes appropriate symlinks in buzz-fixed to buzz and
buzz-fixes, writes the buzz-fixed Packages file, updates the
patchlevel and replaces the Debian-1.1.<patchlevel> link with a new
one.

Comments - especially from the members of iwj-mastercron@master - are
welcome.

Ian.

---

From: Lars Wirzenius <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 1996 04:45:07 +0300

[ NB: I read the list.  Don't CC replies to me.  I pay for my PPP.  Thanks ]

> which Debian-1.1.<patchlevel> and stable are made to point.

I'm happy if we can get one soon.

I'm not sure I understood what you meant.  Let me paraphrase what I
think you might have meant, and you'll correct me:

	1. Create buzz-fixed as a symlink copy of buzz.
	2. When a package is released that must go into buzz-fixes,
	   a symlink to it also goes to buzz-fixed.
	3. Rebuild buzz-fixes/Packages and buzz-fixed/Packages.  
	
Nothing changes under buzz, right?
	
Actually, I'm not sure we need buzz-fixes/Packages, but if we do, shouldn't
it be identical to buzz-fixed/Packages?

I have a slight preference to having the packages in buzz-fixes and
only symlinks in buzz-fixed (remember: buzz-fixed is initially just a
symlink copy of buzz), but I don't really care either way.

If I'm completely wrong, just say so.  I'm hazy on how all this works
in practice.

If I'm right, I don't think I have anything to complain about, except
that the name difference buzz-fixes and buzz-fixed is too small; perhaps
buzz-fixes and buzz-better would be better names?  (I think we already
have buzz-fixes, although my mirror is still downloading.)

> Comments - especially from the members of iwj-mastercron@master - are

Oops, sorry. :)