Hi,

I have just noticed that it appears currently not possible to have split
packages that have some packages in [core] and others in [extra]. This
make the gcc split a lot less attractive (gcc-{fortran,objc,ada} are all
currently in [core] and not [extra] where I intended). Does anyone have
ideas on how we could handle this?


Allan

Am Mittwoch 28 Oktober 2009 04:47:31 schrieb Allan McRae:
> Does anyone have
> ideas on how we could handle this?

I think we discussed this when introducing split packages. With our current
repo structure in svn this is not really possible.

--

Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre

Pierre Schmitz wrote:

Am Mittwoch 28 Oktober 2009 04:47:31 schrieb Allan McRae:

Does anyone have
ideas on how we could handle this?



I think we discussed this when introducing split packages. With our current
repo structure in svn this is not really possible.



How badly would I break things doing this:
- copy repos/core-i686 to repos/extra-i686
- manually move the gcc packages that should not be in [core].

I suppose that would result in missing package complaints by our cleanup
script...



What would need done to our current svn repo structure to support this?
Is having the svn entries only in the $pkgbase folder rather than a
folder for each package a real problem?


Allan

Am Mittwoch 28 Oktober 2009 07:26:23 schrieb Allan McRae:
> Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch 28 Oktober 2009 04:47:31 schrieb Allan McRae:
> >> Does anyone have
> >> ideas on how we could handle this?
> >
> > I think we discussed this when introducing split packages. With our
> > current repo structure in svn this is not really possible.
>
> How badly would I break things doing this:
> - copy repos/core-i686 to repos/extra-i686
> - manually move the gcc packages that should not be in [core].
>
> I suppose that would result in missing package complaints by our cleanup
> script...
>
>
> What would need done to our current svn repo structure to support this?
> Is having the svn entries only in the $pkgbase folder rather than a
> folder for each package a real problem?
>
> Allan
>

Couldn't you just keep the whole gcc to core for now?

--

Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre

Pierre Schmitz wrote:

Am Mittwoch 28 Oktober 2009 07:26:23 schrieb Allan McRae:


Pierre Schmitz wrote:


Am Mittwoch 28 Oktober 2009 04:47:31 schrieb Allan McRae:


Does anyone have
ideas on how we could handle this?


I think we discussed this when introducing split packages. With our
current repo structure in svn this is not really possible.


How badly would I break things doing this:
- copy repos/core-i686 to repos/extra-i686
- manually move the gcc packages that should not be in [core].

I suppose that would result in missing package complaints by our cleanup
script...


What would need done to our current svn repo structure to support this?
Is having the svn entries only in the $pkgbase folder rather than a
folder for each package a real problem?



Couldn't you just keep the whole gcc to core for now?



Well, of course. But that is not really fixing anything and I know that
"for now" will extend to "for ever" if nothing is done at this stage.


Allan

Allan McRae schrieb:

Hi,

I have just noticed that it appears currently not possible to have split
packages that have some packages in [core] and others in [extra]. This
make the gcc split a lot less attractive (gcc-{fortran,objc,ada} are all
currently in [core] and not [extra] where I intended). Does anyone have
ideas on how we could handle this?


Just db-remove them all from testing, archrelease core and extra, put
the packages in the right staging dir and run the db. It should work I
guess.


That said, I want it too.

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 3:37 AM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
> Allan McRae schrieb:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have just noticed that it appears currently not possible to have split
>> packages that have some packages in [core] and others in [extra]. * This
>> make the gcc split a lot less attractive (gcc-{fortran,objc,ada} are all
>> currently in [core] and not [extra] where I intended). *Does anyone have
>> ideas on how we could handle this?
>
> Just db-remove them all from testing, archrelease core and extra, put the
> packages in the right staging dir and run the db. It should work I guess.
>
> That said, I want it too.

What would need to be done to make this easier? If the above works
(and I don't know why it wouldn't), it seems fairly straightforward to
me.

Aaron Griffin schrieb:

What would need to be done to make this easier? If the above works
(and I don't know why it wouldn't), it seems fairly straightforward to
me.



- testingpkg, extrapkg etc. and so on need to be able to push packages
to different staging directories and commit to multiple repos/*
directories at the same time

- db-move needs to handle all cases where
* packages move from testing to core and extra
* some packages move from core to extra, but others remain in core
(and vice versa)

* maybe more
by not removing the old repos/* directories

I guess that's it.