Lamar Owen writes:
> > But that is assymetric.
>
> Yes, it is. However, it has been done before when it made sense to do so.
It would imply that there is some general or master SRPM and the other
ones are alternative versions. So people looking for a SRPM would easily
be led to download the wrong one. In fact, they are parallel variants, so
a parallel directory structure seems right to me.
Another problem is that changing the directory layout would make the
automatic mirroring impossible.
> That solution has the disadvantage of either storing multiple identical source
> RPM's or maintaining multiple links to the single source RPM. There will be
> a fedora-core-1, a redhat-9, and redhat-8.0, a redhat-7.3, an aurora-1.0, and
> possibly a redhat-6.2 that will hopefully use the single source RPM. Now I
> can maintain links to the single one, or I can waste 10MB of space per
> distribution.
So why don't you do
binary/redhat/
SRPMS
fedora-this
redhat-that
> But I didn't do it that way, putting the 'canonical' source RPM into a
> separate SRPMS dir, since the idea of the single source RPM was to be
> distribution-independent.
Realistically, a distribution independent source RPM is unrealistic. It's
a bit sad, but the market has decided.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net