Hi,
I am in the process of making reprepro support multiple packages per
distribution/architecture/component/type quadruple. This requires bigger
changes in the database layout and all internal logic. I have a working
prototype (for including binary packages). I plan to extent this patch
to get it in an upstream acceptable state. I like to have guidance how
to implement some things before implementing them to avoid a result that
will be rejected.
The first step is to agree on the database layout change. I came up with
two alternatives:
1) Allow duplicate entries in packages.db and sort duplicate entries by
their Debian version. They can be sorted a) upwards or b) downwards.
Depending on the request, we will either search for all versions of a
package, one specific version of the package, or for the latest version
of a package.
2) Rename the key of packages.db to also contain the version of the
package, e.g. "sl|3.03-17" or "hello_2.8-4" (which delimiter should we
use?). This would allow us to check directly for a specific version of a
package. We need to add a secondary table that allows us to access the
database as described in 1) through the secondary table. This secondary
table will allow duplicate entries and the values of the secondary table
point to the key in packages.db. Depending on the task, we either query
the first or secondary table. The secondary table will be kept in sync
by BerkeleyDB.
In the first case, we need to add a function to iterate over the
duplicate packages to find a specific version. In the second case, we
need to create the secondary table and transform the database.
Which layout do you prefer?
Another issue is the sorting of the packages in the database. We need
one function to sort all entries in the table. So we need one function
to sort binary packages and source packages, but we have
binaries_getversion() and source_getversion(). Here's the example code
(without the error handling) of the sorting function:
static int debianversioncompare(UNUSED(DB *db), const DBT *a, const DBT *b) {
char *a_version, *b_version;
int versioncmp;
binaries_getversion(a->data, &a_version);
binaries_getversion(b->data, &b_version);
dpkgversions_cmp(a_version, b_version, &versioncmp);
return versioncmp;
}
Do you have a suggestion how to improve this function?
Cheers,
Benjamin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
