This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: noarching source packages
Jon Turney writes:
> The assumption that the "package" part is unique for installable
> packages is rather deeply entrenched, and I don't actually see any
> benefit apart from the aesthetic in changing this now.
Well, it's not really the aesthetics: the debuginfo package is, like the
source package something auxiliary, so it still irks me that it is
treated as a first class (sub-)package.
> If we're going for a foolish consistency, naming things as
> package-version[-purpose]-release would be probably easier to
> implement :-)
*shrugs* That boat has sailed exactly how long ago?
> I think it would be much better to have the associated debuginfo for a
> package described in setup.ini, rather than mapping package name ->
> source package name -> debuginfo package name, as you seem to be suggesting.
I'd settle for consistent treatment with the other auxiliary package,
> I'm not sure how many people are the situation of "I want to maintain
> a mirror, but can't use rsync".
I'm quite certain that practically all corporate networks are walled off
one way or the other. In fact I've gone through the exercise of
requesting rsync access to the outside, only to be denied.
> It seems a reasonable intuition that a more compact directory tree
> would be somewhat more efficient, but that is basically saying that
> the connection setup time for transferring index.html dominates.
It does, and the proxy I need to go through decidedly slows down the
access even further. I know since I can do the same thing from home
> Have you tried a HTTP mirroring tool which can parallelize it's
> requests (assuming such a thing exists, I think axel can do that)?
I already have a quite elaborate lftp script for doing that that does
several things in parallel.
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+
SD adaptation for Waldorf microQ V2.22R2: