On Tue, 2015-05-05 at 09:17 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > [Speaking for the debian-hurd team] > > Lucas Nussbaum, le Mon 04 May 2015 08:28:22 +0200, a écrit : > > Maybe it's just about supporting and advertising debian-ports as > > Debian's official way to host second-class architectures. Maybe > > there's more to it. What are the current downsides of moving hurd-i386 > > and sparc to debian-ports?
One of the main problems with debian-ports is that the Sources.gz file is empty: http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian/dists/unreleased/main/source/ [DIR] Parent Directory Release 16-Aug-2013 08:22 119 Sources.bz2 05-May-2015 06:22 28 Sources.gz 05-May-2015 06:22 0 The only allowed sources.gz file is e.g. for sid: http://ftp.se.debian.org/debian/dists/sid/main/source/Sources.gz As a work-around architecture-dependent sources have to be uploaded to the corresponding binary tree, e.g. http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian/pool-hurd-i386/main/libg/libgnome-keyring/ <*.deb files> libgnome-keyring_3.12.0-1+hurd.1.debian.tar.xz 22-Apr-2015 18:59 5.5K libgnome-keyring_3.12.0-1+hurd.1.dsc 22-Apr-2015 18:59 2.8K libgnome-keyring_3.12.0.orig.tar.xz 22-Apr-2015 18:58 425K and the source files can be obtained with dget /path/to/the/*.dsc The number of architecture-dependent packages is low, for Hurd currently 26, to be lowered significantly when some Upstream and Debian bugs have been resolved. Is there no straight-forward way to solve this problem? According to Samuel, it is due to Debian Archive Kit (dak) complexity. Can somebody explain why it is so difficult? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1430830855.4404.142.ca...@gmail.com