Re: debian packages in ftp.gnome-db.org

[Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org>]

On 01 Dec 2000 19:40:39 +0100, Holger Thon wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 08:23:55PM +0900, Akira TAGOH wrote:
> > Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 20:23:55 +0900
> > From: Akira TAGOH <tagoh gnome-db org>
> > To: Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org>
> > Cc: gnome-db-list gnome org
> > Subject: Re: debian packages in ftp.gnome-db.org
> > In-Reply-To: <200011300000 BAA06878 ulises openresources com>
> > User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.4.0 (Rio-pre3) EMY/1.13.9 (Art is long, life is short) FLIM/1.14.0 (Ninokuchi) APEL/10.2 MULE XEmacs/21.2 (beta37) (Pan) (i386-debian-linux)
> > Organization: GNOME-DB Project
> > Precedence: bulk
> > 
> > >>>>> On 29 Nov 2000 22:59:39 -0100,
> > >>>>> "RM" == Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org> wrote:
> > 
> > RM> Hi all!
> > RM> I need some advice (specially from Akira) on how to organize the debian
> > RM> packages in
> > RM> ftp.gnome-db.org. That is, should we just provide a FTP area, with all
> > RM> version's debs,
> > RM> or a good aptable source?
> 
> I recommend a tree like
> 
> dists/potato/main/binary-i386
> 
> In which subdir this tree resides does not matter.
> It'd be great, if the ftp area could also be made available via http (e.g.
> a read only directory entry ftp which points to the pub dir of the ftp
> environment).
> 
> > 
> > Is debian's potato tree provide gnome-db?
> > That can't probably be here. because potato doesn't include
> > bonobo, and potato's GNOME is October GNOME. it's too old.
> 
> No, potato neither has gnome-db nor bonobo. You're right that official potato
> has been released with october gnome (1.0).
> 
> But: - There are prepackaged versions of gnome 1.2 available from helixcode
>        (i have spidermonkey.helixcode.com in my apt.sources).
>      - Debian potato packaged by Linuxland has an additional CD with Helixcode
>      - ftp.fsn.hu's extra CD #4 containing Debian 2.2r1 fixes also 
>        contains Helixcode
>        (cd are also available mounted, so it'd be an apt-get alternative)
> 
> So what i repackaged additionaly is (got of nautilus sources/woody sources):
> - bonobo 0.28
> - gconf 0.11
> - oaf 0.6.1
> - unixodbc 1.8.13
> - sybase ase 11.9.2 fake packages to meet dependencies
> 
> I suggest to put these packages into dists/potato/extra/binary-i386.
> The libgda stuff for potato would be in dists/potato/main/binary-i386/misc.
> An apt.sources would read like:
> 
> deb ftp://ftp.gnome-db.org/pub/debian potato main extra
> 
> The sybase provider is in non-free/misc section, because Debian is very precise
> on Licence policies. ;-)
> > 
> > even if we provide the potato's gnome-db, I think that it
> > isn't almost different from woody.
> 
> The problem for woody packages is, that they won't work on potato systems. In
> actual woody tree, e.g. glibc 2.2 is used. So we'd need an additional binary
> tree. Or, we just put the sources with the debian diffs in the sourcetree and
> let potato users compile them. Though, that might bring up the thread 
> "gnome-db and bonobo version" again. ;-)
> 
> As an attachment you get the packages files, so you can decide if they should
> come onto ftp or not. The binaries (gda stuff + additional packages) are
> 5 MB.
> 
ok, I agree with everything. Packages for potato should be available. So Holger

please, upload them to ftp.gnome-db.org. But remember that the top-level
directory
for gnome-db stuff in that machine is /pub/gnome-db/, and not /pub/.
There are other web
sites there, so we've got a separated directory for us.

You can upload them, can't you? If not, send them to me and I'll do it
myself.

cheers