Buildsys issues

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Am Sonntag, den 06.11.2005, 13:49 -0500 schrieb seth vidal:
> > Why do we have a repoview per arch? IMHO it would it be a lot easier to
> > read and browse the repoview-files if we would have one general
> > interface for all archs. 
> > 
> > Each package description should then of course have a section like this:
> > 
> > "This package is available for these archs:
> > i386 <download  link>
> > x86_64 <download link>
> > ppc <download link>
> > " 
> 
> b/c we have multiple repositories. and repoview generates per
> repository.

Sorry, it took me a week to get back to this issue. I looked at it
closer and understand now why it's that way atm. But IMHO that is more
and excuse then a reason. We could add a additional meta-repo that
includes srpm, i386, x86_64 and ppc. Run repoview afterwards and "tata",
we have what I suggested: A repoview html page similar to the current
ones but with links to packages for all archs (e.g. ppc. i386 and
x86_64) and even a link to the srpm. That's IMHO a lot prettier than
before. 

Simply doing this is all afaics:

$ ls
i386  SRPMS  x86_64
$ createrepo .
[...]
$ repoview .
[...]
$ mv repodata/ html
$ rm html/filelists.xml.gz  html/other.xml.gz  html/primary.xml.gz
html/repomd.xml

And on the next update:
$ createrepo .
[...]
$ mv html/repoview html/index.html repodata/
# this way repoview will reuse a lot of the old pages afaik
$ repoview .
[...]
$ rm -rf html 
$ mv repodata/ html
$ rm html/filelists.xml.gz  html/other.xml.gz  html/primary.xml.gz
html/repomd.xml

This of course makes the push step once again a bit longer. But if we're
going to create the repodata asynchronus anyway we IMHO should implement
the above. 
-- 
Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora at leemhuis.info>