[Mageia-discuss] Mageia Mirror size

[Michael Scherer]

Le dimanche 03 octobre 2010 à 22:59 +0200, Olivier Blin a écrit :
> Michael Scherer <misc at zarb.org> writes:
> 
> >> Yes, noarch are supposed to be hardlinked already.
> >> But it could make the upload process simpler to have noarch in a
> >> separate directory (no need to hardlink to all arches), and genhdlist2
> >> faster (by splitting out a noarch hdlist).
> >
> > But this requires all arch to be synced.
> > While we achieved this for x86 and x86_64, this was not the case in the
> > past for sparc and ppc. Given the fact that arm is surely gonna play a
> > important role, what would be the impact on various non synced ports of
> > Mageia, if any ? 
> 
> Why would they be unsynced?

Well, mainly because we traditionally did like this, as I said. I guess
I was not clear :/
 
> If we have a separate directory for noarch, it could be shared by all
> arches, which means there would be no such unsync issue.

We have 2 choices : 
- all arch synced ( ie, x86 and x86_64 for now, likely arm and others in
the future )
- main archs synced, others possibly unsynced ( either the time to be
ported, or more "permanently" ).

In the past, we did it the secund way. Arm was ported from stable
release, ppc, sparc were develop as side arch, etc.

Since arm buildbots may be slower than x86 builder, using solution 1
( everything synced ) can cause trouble. Noarch rpm will be synced, but
since some noarch depend on arch dependent rpms ( like python modules
who depend on the version of python, or packages who produces
arch-dependent and noarch rpms ), we will need to keep also binary rpm
in sync.
So that mean we will have to wait on the slower builder before
uploading. Think of open office, for example. 

So if we want to offer cauldron arm, how will we do ?
And if we do, would this impact the proposed layout ?

-- 
Michael Scherer