On Thu, 2004-10-07 at 09:26 +0100, Philip Hazel wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Oct 2004, Tim Jackson wrote:
>
> > I don't know who's responsibility this lies under, but if someone fancies
> > giving me access (directly or indirectly) to ftp.exim.org then I don't
> > mind (for the time being) maintaining the RPMs on there (at least SRPMs
> > and possibly a couple of binary RPMs - though I can't promise to have such
> > a full selection as Nigel managed).
Probably a good idea to keep it relatively small - the range was killing
me.... even using mach (virtual installs setup to handle builds for
different platforms) you still end up doing backflips through hoops to
make em all build (RH73 is especially bad as you have to rebuild the
SRPM for it and then build from that as the build dependancies are
different).
> I guess we probably need to think about this in the long term planning
> for exim.org, which as you know is currently in a state of flux (I am
> actively moving into cvs at the moment).
We will need to offer degrees of write access for sesame. And there
lies a nice management problem :-/
In the short term, could you make them available on your boxes by
rsync/www/ftp and I can mirror them across to sesame - thats currently
how the exim source gets onto there. You can always keep the original
location mostly secret so preserving your bandwidth.
Nigel.
--
[ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@??? ]
[ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]
