On Wednesday 19 March 2008, Michal Suchanek wrote: > On 18/03/2008, Samuel Thibault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Michal Suchanek, le Mon 17 Mar 2008 16:34:42 +0100, a écrit : > > > On 17/03/2008, Samuel Thibault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Arne Babenhauserheide, le Mon 17 Mar 2008 12:26:30 +0100, a écrit : > > > > > > As for automatically building live CDs and/or qemu images, > > > > > > this would be > > > > > > > > > > > > very useful -- maybe that part is indeed an appropriate > > > > > > task for GSoC. But as others pointed out, there are often > > > > > > issues with building a working system that require manual > > > > > > intervention; so it's questionable how far this process can > > > > > > really be automated... I think this needs some more > > > > > > consideration. > > > > > > > > > > Maybe some people with more background knowledge could add > > > > > their feedback there. > > > > > > > > > > Would it be possible to simplify the process _a lot_ with the > > > > > right tools? > > > > > > > > The problem is that there is no easy automatic process: missing > > > > dependencies have to be found in the archive, etc. > > > > > > What kind of archive? Shouldn't Debian just keep the packages > > > until new ones are built? > > > > Debian doesn't wait for non-official architectures to catch up. > > They do delete Hurd packages when there are no new ones to replace > them? I can usually see different versions of packages for different > architectures. > > > > Can't there be a server with a Hurd repository that archives > > > enough of core packages to allow building a Hurd system out of > > > these? > > > > The problem is to determine automatically what has to be kept. > > Everything. There aren't that many packages for the Hurd. Plus keep > all versions of packages on some "hurd-core" list until somebody > manually marks a newer version as verified working.
Sorry to be rather late joining this thread. A considerable amount of manual intervention is required to build the Hurd iso's. Which version of a package? Finding a replacement for a broken package. Can we move from apt to aptitude? And so on. From the iso building pov the Debian GNU/Hurd archive is a mess - but at least the Debian archive exists. debian-ports.org is vital, but it is not/cannot be integrated into the main archive. The Hurd is bigger than most people realise, 17 CD iso's of packages that can in theory be installed, but most of them are rather useless. Something else the iso builder has to sort out. My policy over the eight years I have been building the iso's has been to disturb the development process as little as possible. However, people may have got the idea that producing a disc set is a relatively quick automated process. It takes me 30-50 hours to produce a set. The development over this time has been considerable, from one partialy filled CD (with dependency checking disabled) to K15 and its 17 images. Please note that I am trying to retire from this task. Age is catching up with me. Phil. -- Philip Charles; 39a Paterson Street, Abbotsford, Dunedin, New Zealand +64 3 488 2818 Fax +64 3 488 2875 Mobile 027 663 4453 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - personal. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - business
