Re: [PATCH] Remove some legacy stuff that's no longer relevant from .discinfo/.treeinfo

[Elliot Peele <elliot rpath com>]

On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 10:39 -0500, Jeremy Katz wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 11:30 +0100, Joel Andres Granados wrote:
> > Why remove package dir from the treeinfo info?  better.  Why remove
> > the info pointing to the package dirs?  In fedora where the only
> > package dir is Packages its a little redundant to have this info in
> > the treeinfo file.  but in other spins, where you might want to
> > separate your repos into logical sections (RHEL) it might not work as
> > well.  The buildinstall process itself does not need this information
> > because it just needs the anaconda-runtime package to build (AFAICT),
> > but it would be good to be able to put a list of "package dirs" into
> > the treeinfo file to reflect the stage of the tree.
> > I would leave this change but put in some type of probing logic in
> > treeinfo so as to find all the dirs that contain repositories (a valid
> > repodata file) and put it in the treeinfo file.
> 
> The package dir stuff is related to product path.  In the day (today)
> where everything is dependent on having repodata available, the
> product/package path as it used to be is just no longer relevant.  Even
> for products which have multiple sets of repodata on the discs. 

Not everything requires repodata, conary for instance. The conary
backend makes use of the product/package path.

Elliot