seth vidal wrote: >>It would be more symmetric to just have >> >>server0=url://server0/path/url >>server1=url://server0/path/url >>server2=url://server0/path/url >>... >> >>More descriptive, too, as server1 may not be a mirror but a different >>server altogether, although one hopes that the requested RPM's and >>groups are in the intersection of what the servers provide. > > > that doesn't mesh with the model we already have. - I like the idea of > collapsible and multiple servers. I also like the idea of servers > providing SPECIFIC sets of files and not just being a grab-bag whence > rpms arrive. > > so maybe something like: > > [serverid] > name="laalalal" > priurl=url://serverlalala/path > alturl0=url://altserver/path > alturl1 > etc etc etc ad nauseum. > > the reason being I think the user might want to know if/when a server > fails and my general opinion is this: > Syntax for the conf file, I'll leave in your hands. As long as it makes general sense, I won't scream. > I think the general rule to follow should be: > > > if we can't get to any server/mirror in a single server section we exit > w/error > if we can't get a headers.info file for any server-section we exit > w/error > if we can't get a header that the headers.info file claims exist we exit > w/error. > if we can't get an rpm that the headers.info file claims exist we exit > w/error. > if we get an rpm that fails the gpg/md5 check we exit w/error. > > > in general I want the default case to be "do nothing but tell you about > it" rather than "try our best to continue despite the servers spewing > lies and filth". > > It might cause more work for a user but I tend to the "don't break > stuff" camp when it comes to installing things. > > > -sv > I believe this is quite reasonable and sounds good. Troy
