David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. wrote:
Listmates,
I'm building a local repo for boxes to update via the lan instead of redownloading. I have my repo on my local server as:
You might want to look into this: http://xyne.archlinux.ca/info/pkgd
arch/ x86/ x86_64/
I have moved all files for my two x86_64 boxes to the arch/x86_64 dir and I am filtering with a script to eliminate dups by moving the lesser numbered packages to arch/x86_64/oldpkgs. Testing the script before the actual move of packages, I ran across this anomaly in some filenames: (script output) [1]
<snip>
ttf-isabella-1.003-3.pkg.tar.gz -> oldpkgs ttf-isabella-1.003-4-x86_64.pkg.tar.gz
tunepimp-0.5.3-5.pkg.tar.gz -> oldpkgs tunepimp-0.5.3-6-x86_64.pkg.tar.gz
tzdata-2009f-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.gz -> oldpkgs tzdata-2009g-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.gz
unrar-3.8.5-2-x86_64.pkg.tar.gz -> oldpkgs unrar-3.9.1-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.gz
<snip>
As shown above, there are multiple packages where the earlier version did *not* contain the x86_64 designation where the current package now does. Are these the same packages? If so why did earlier packages not have the x86_64 and when was the architecture added? Are all packages now going to have the architecture specified?
Pre pacman-3.0 (I think), the architecture was not included in the file name. Anything in the [community] repo still will not have the architecture name as the [community] repo scripts do not handle it yet. Allan