| 1 |
On Tue, 2004-10-12 at 15:57 -0400, Nick Dimiduk wrote: |
| 2 |
> Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> > We were talking about this on IRC due to the growing concern over |
| 5 |
> > patches and other files in ${FILESDIR} in the portage tree. This is |
| 6 |
> > basically the idea that we came up with to resolve the problem. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Why do we need a separate location for patches? How are they |
| 10 |
> fundamentally different from the sources in distfiles? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Write a patch yourself and add it to /space/disfiles-local and see how |
| 13 |
long it takes to get to *all* the mirrors. Now look at how many bugs |
| 14 |
you have for missing files (your patch). |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
The point is that people want to see the patches removed from |
| 17 |
${FILESDIR} and moved to ${DISTDIR}, but the distfiles replication is |
| 18 |
too slow for this to work properly. Because of this, we came up with |
| 19 |
this proposal for a temporary location to hold patches that are |
| 20 |
available on-demand and immediately, before the distfiles sync takes |
| 21 |
place. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Currently, many of us are using dev.gentoo.org for this purpose. This |
| 24 |
proposal is to move this to a supported infrastructure with some |
| 25 |
redundancy rather than a single point of failure. |
Archives