On 2010-05-03, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
On Sun, 02 May 2010 18:10:40 +0200, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
What about a directory structure like this? We could also remove the os subdir and backwards compatibility could be achieved by some symlinks.
ftp └── repo ├── arch │ ├── core │ ├── extra │ ├── packages │ └── testing └── community ├── community ├── community-testing └── packages
The actual names might not be final, but with this structure we separate our repos from everything else on the ftp and we separate the "official" and community repos from each other.
I like this.
Here is a proposal which is more backwards-compatible and doesn't need a complete resync; just a few modificatinos to the db-scripts. (e.g. we need to define which repos the cleanup-script should check)
ftp ├── core ├── extra ├── testing ├── community ├── community-testing └── packages ├── arch │ ├── i686 │ ├── x86_64 │ └── any └── community ├── i686 ├── x86_64 └── any
The top dir repo dirs are kept. They include symlinks to the packages in the packages dir. Packages from community are kept separate. We now just need to modify the db-scripts and define the repository names it should work on. (especialy the cleanup-script should only search in core,extra and testing but not community for example.
The community, community-testing and packages/community dirs would still be rsynced from sigurd.
What do you think about this layout? It wont need any chagne on the clients (mirrorlists still work) and no resyncs are needed.
I fail to see why resyncs are not needed in this situation. Let's suppose we have /foo/bar on a downstream mirror, and upstream has /foo/bar -> /baz/bar will rsync guess that it should not download bar and instead just copy it from foo to baz locally? -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)