[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-fai
Subject:    Re: fai-mirror for non-fai-system architectures (bug)
From:       "C. V." <list-user () backenhoernchen ! de>
Date:       2011-05-17 4:44:31
Message-ID: 22904475.2899.1305607471027.JavaMail.root () zm0
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi,

----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
> Hi Michael,
> 
> sorry that I answer this late.
> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
> > Hi!
> > 
[...]
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > Thanks a lot for looking into this problem in such detail. It seems
> > that the -a
> > option was not properly implemented at some point. This point,
> > however, remained
> > unclear to me: Which version of FAI are you using? I've looked at
> > the
> > code in
> > current trunk and unfortunately it seems that the patch you
> > described
> > will no
> > longer apply: These parts of the code have been rewritten a while
> > ago.
> > Could you
> > hence please do us a favour: Could you give the experimental
> > packages
> > (current
> > version should be 4.0~beta2+experimental28) a try? It's absolutely
> > possible that
> > these suffer from the same brokenness, but it would be very
> > important
> > to be sure
> > about it.
> 
> I am using the lenny backports Version 3.3.5. That seems to be not the
> newest. I am very busy these days, so I am not able to test it right
> now. It will probably take at least one moth till I have time to test
> it.
> 

I am now migrating to Debian Squeeze. I did not have time to test experimental \
packages. My time is very limited. After migrating the first machines to Squeeze, I \
am really surprised that you told me last time to test the experimental packages. The \
Version 3.x.x is still stable after all this time and is even in the new release of \
Debian. Leaving this obvious bug in the current stable release is far from good. \
Specially after I just noticed that you updated to a new 3.x stable release, I am \
really surprised.

I don't really know if anyone noticed the problem at all, because as long as there is \
a mirror available through network connection, you most likely will not notice this \
problem.

I really hope you will integrate this patch in you next stable of 3.x and worry about \
version 4 later.

I corrected fai-mirror for Version 3.4.7 again. The diff is as follows:

--- fai-mirror  2011-05-15 08:31:19.000000000 +0200
+++ fai-mirror.corrected-3.4.7  2011-05-17 06:31:33.000000000 +0200
@@ -301,18 +301,23 @@
 # since Packages.gz from apt-move does not include packages from my
 # repository, let's use apt-ftparchive for generiating correct index
 # files
-pfilegz=$(find $mirrordir/dists -name Packages.gz)
 pfile=$(find $mirrordir/dists -name Packages)
 pdist=$(cd $mirrordir/dists ; ls)
 cd $mirrordir
-# md5sums of apt-move are not valid, when we recreate Packages.gz using
-# apt-ftparchive, but we can use the header of the Release file
-grep -B99 MD5Sum:  $mirrordir/dists/$pdist/Release | grep -v MD5Sum: > \
                $mirrordir/tmpfile
-rm $mirrordir/dists/$pdist/Release
-apt-ftparchive packages pool > $pfile
-gzip -c $pfile > $pfilegz
-apt-ftparchive release dists/$pdist >> tmpfile
-mv tmpfile dists/$pdist/Release
+for pdist_item in $pdist; do
+  # md5sums of apt-move are not valid, when we recreate Packages.gz using
+  # apt-ftparchive, but we can use the header of the Release file
+  grep -B99 MD5Sum:  $mirrordir/dists/$pdist_item/Release | grep -v MD5Sum: > \
$mirrordir/tmpfile +  rm $mirrordir/dists/$pdist_item/Release
+
+  for pfile_item in $pfile; do
+    apt-ftparchive packages pool > $pfile_item
+    gzip -c $pfile_item > ${pfile_item}.gz
+  done
+
+  apt-ftparchive release dists/$pdist_item >> tmpfile
+  mv tmpfile dists/$pdist_item/Release
+done

 echo "$0 finished."
 echo -n "Mirror size and location: ";du -sh $mirrordir


Regards,
Corren


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]