| 1 |
On 12/9/12 1:17 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote: |
| 2 |
> Starting from a question by Markos in #gentoo-portage about whether to |
| 3 |
> remove entries in profiles/updates for tree-cleaned packages... |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
What's the advantage of doing that? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> I propose that we say, once a year, schedule a tree-cleaning of old |
| 8 |
> updates files. These updates files could be added to a tarball made |
| 9 |
> available for download. That way if they are needed to update a system |
| 10 |
> older than what the main tree has been tree-cleaned to. They can then be |
| 11 |
> manually downloaded, extracted to the normal location and then run the |
| 12 |
> "fixpackages" command. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I think that complicates the process. :-/ But maybe the advantages |
| 15 |
outweigh that. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> The main question here is what is a reasonable length of time to keep |
| 18 |
> the updates actively in-tree? |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> -- From my experience in the forums, I think any updates older than |
| 21 |
> 4 years should be subject to tree-cleaning. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Yeah, 4 years is ancient and would probably be non-trivial to update anyway. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> -- Most old systems that have been updated tend to be less than that, |
| 26 |
> probably about 2 years. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
2 years seem reasonable. |
Archives