[Slapt-get-devel] Proposal - handling of missing sources

Jason Woodward woodwardj at jaos.org
Thu Feb 9 00:07:08 EST 2006

Hi A.J.,

> I would like to make a suggestion that would greatly increase the general 
> usability of slapt-get/gslapt for ordinary users, based on the usage patterns 
> I perceive with my customers.
> One of the things that most confuse them is why when a source fails, nothing 
> else updates, in particular if that source is on removable media.
> The current versions of slap-get will, if a source fails simply not update at 
> all. I believe it SHOULD if a source fails, just SKIP that source and still 
> enable updates from other configured sources, this way one would not need to 
> edit the sources to get a critical update form one server if another is down 
> as you have to do at present.
> Thoughts ?

That makes sense.  The current behavior was based on the way apt-get handles the same
situation.  Also, when any sources fail, the package_data file isn't overwritten so that the
current package data remains available.  

Maybe if only one source is present and it fails, the package_data isn't overwritten so that
--show, --search, --list|available etc still work.  But if there are multiple sources and at
least one succeeded, the package_data file is populated with only the succeeding source.  The
main concern for me with this is that the failing package source would be the most important
(say a slackware proper mirror) and the user somehow misses this and wonders why his package
list is only showing a half dozen packages.  I can see cons to both approaches.  I still lean
towards bailing on any failure so the user can correct a bad SOURCE entry or try another
mirror.   Maybe thats just what I would expect or prefer.  

Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

take care,

Jason Woodward
woodwardj at jaos.org

Jason Woodward
woodwardj at jaos.org

More information about the Slapt-get-devel mailing list