FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-20-2011, 02:57 AM
Diego Elio Pettenò
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

Il giorno mer, 19/01/2011 alle 22.31 -0500, Mike Frysinger ha scritto:
> we havent
> hosted files on dev.g.o because we've felt the distfiles tree to be
> sufficient. since there seems to be more need now, let's find out
> what infra
> can do to help out.

I'm pretty sure you have, for pax-utils and portage-utils, didn't you?


> here's a better idea: figure out something with the infra team.
> [snip]
> again, declaring policy ahead of talking to anyone else is not the way
> to go.

Actually, we meant to move to a stable archive of distfiles for years,
and Robin has been working on it for months already.

The policy, that as chithanh pointed out needs to be updated, is just
going to cause more grief by the time you want to pick up the old files
for whatever reason. Ulrich (ulm) and Christian (fauli) knows how much a
pain it becomes.

--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
 
Old 01-20-2011, 03:25 AM
"Robin H. Johnson"
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 04:57:59AM +0100, Diego Elio Petten wrote:
> > here's a better idea: figure out something with the infra team.
> > [snip]
> > again, declaring policy ahead of talking to anyone else is not the way
> > to go.
> Actually, we meant to move to a stable archive of distfiles for years,
> and Robin has been working on it for months already.
Here's the previous proposal, with all comments merged into it
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=176186#c15

--
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee & Infrastructure Lead
E-Mail : robbat2@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
 
Old 01-20-2011, 05:23 AM
"Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

On 1/20/11 1:50 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> If you produced the file yourself, and it doesn't matter if the file is
> reproducible (unless it is reproducible to sha512 identity), please use
> the public_html directory in your dev.gentoo.org home to host these.
> This makes sure that the file won't be deleted from all its sources if
> the ebuild is removed (or more likely replaced) from tree. Ask the Emacs
> team how "easy" has been to recover gentoo-syntax files before.

Storing distfiles in public_html is not a perfect solution either. If
the developer retires, what do we do with the files?
 
Old 01-20-2011, 06:19 AM
Ulrich Mueller
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

>>>>> On Thu, 20 Jan 2011, Diego Elio Petten wrote:

> The policy, that as chithanh pointed out needs to be updated, is
> just going to cause more grief by the time you want to pick up the
> old files for whatever reason. Ulrich (ulm) and Christian (fauli)
> knows how much a pain it becomes.

<irony>
Oh, that was easy: We found some forgotten distfile mirrors that
hadn't been updated for several years. And for the files then still
missing, we sent a plea for help to -dev (or was it planet?) and had
them mailed to us by users.
</irony>

Thanks again to our users who had helped us at the time.

Ulrich
 
Old 01-20-2011, 07:17 AM
Peter Volkov
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

В Чтв, 20/01/2011 в 03:50 +0100, Diego Elio Pettenò пишет:
> Do you really think I should have "discussed" with "a team" about this?
> More than asking Robin as part of infra if it's okay (with his answer
> being "yeah, that's fine | i do it too", literally)?

This was already mentioned in this thread, but still. AFAIR (betelgeuse
knows better) average developer's age is less then three years and thus,
many files hosted in home directory became unavailable after developer
retires. Thus the solution you propose does not address the problem we
have and it's not a nice to enforce it in the policy (without some
additional policy to keep developer's home directory on server for three
years and anyway this needs discussion with infra first).

--
Peter.
 
Old 01-20-2011, 10:16 AM
Christian Faulhammer
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

Hi,

Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org>:
> missing, we sent a plea for help to -dev (or was it planet?) and had

http://www.faulhammer.org/archiv-mainmenu-31/35-gentoo/293-we-are-looking-for-distfiles

V-Li

--
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode

<URL:http://gentoo.faulhammer.org/>
 
Old 01-20-2011, 12:25 PM
Diego Elio Pettenò
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

Il giorno gio, 20/01/2011 alle 07.23 +0100, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." ha
scritto:
>
> Storing distfiles in public_html is not a perfect solution either. If
> the developer retires, what do we do with the files?

That's why (and I answer to Peter here as well), it is an ad interim
solution. As I said and repeated Robin is working on the final one but
until then we still prefer this method.

Besides, developers' home is usually archived already on retirement so
we can recover the files from there without having to beg users to send
them to us, as Ulrich testified.

--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
 
Old 01-20-2011, 05:34 PM
"Anthony G. Basile"
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

On 01/20/2011 01:23 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> On 1/20/11 1:50 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
>> If you produced the file yourself, and it doesn't matter if the file is
>> reproducible (unless it is reproducible to sha512 identity), please use
>> the public_html directory in your dev.gentoo.org home to host these.
>> This makes sure that the file won't be deleted from all its sources if
>> the ebuild is removed (or more likely replaced) from tree. Ask the Emacs
>> team how "easy" has been to recover gentoo-syntax files before.
> Storing distfiles in public_html is not a perfect solution either. If
> the developer retires, what do we do with the files?
>

There is another problem:

grep mirror /usr/portage/eclass/* | sed -e 's/:.*$//' | sort | uniq

shows 39 eclasses which refer to mirror://

--
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D.
Gentoo Developer
 
Old 01-20-2011, 05:41 PM
"Anthony G. Basile"
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

On 01/20/2011 01:34 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 01/20/2011 01:23 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>> On 1/20/11 1:50 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
>>> If you produced the file yourself, and it doesn't matter if the file is
>>> reproducible (unless it is reproducible to sha512 identity), please use
>>> the public_html directory in your dev.gentoo.org home to host these.
>>> This makes sure that the file won't be deleted from all its sources if
>>> the ebuild is removed (or more likely replaced) from tree. Ask the Emacs
>>> team how "easy" has been to recover gentoo-syntax files before.
>> Storing distfiles in public_html is not a perfect solution either. If
>> the developer retires, what do we do with the files?
>>
> There is another problem:
>
> grep mirror /usr/portage/eclass/* | sed -e 's/:.*$//' | sort | uniq
>
> shows 39 eclasses which refer to mirror://
>
Sorry darkside pointed out that there are other mirrors,

grep "mirror://gentoo" /usr/portage/eclass/* | sed -e 's/:.*$//' |
sort | uniq

shows 16 eclasses which would have to be changed.

--
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D.
Gentoo Developer
 
Old 01-20-2011, 05:41 PM
Matti Bickel
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

On 01/20/2011 01:50 AM, Diego Elio Petten wrote:
> I just wanted to write here a clarification regarding self-produced
> distfiles, such as patchset tarballs, SCM snapshots and the like. Some
> people seem under the impression that the correct way to host these is
> to use mirror://gentoo/ and copy them on /space/distfiles-local on
> dev.g.o. Please don't do this.

As one of those under the impression that mirror://gentoo was the right
choice: why is it bad?

From Fauli's post I gather the emacs team wanted to support ancient
versions and have all files necessary to install an ebuild whatsoever
it's age.
In my case, that would mean installing php-4.0, for example. Why on
earth should I support something like that? If I'm PHP upstream, okay,
maybe allow others to see the evolution of the language. But the
evolution of the php patchset? Sounds not that necessary to me.

So, I'm not opposed to your idea. If ya want to archive your stuff
forever, by all means do it. I just see no point in forcing this on all
devs. So, care to explain or give me pointer on why this is necessary?

Thanks, Matti
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:23 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org