This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--0-1750024150-1165498794=:28078
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=X-UNKNOWN
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Content-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.64.0612070741171.28078@glacier.reedmedia.net>

On Thu, 7 Dec 2006, Przemys=B3aw Pawe=B3czyk wrote:

> On Thu, 7 Dec 2006 12:59:08 +0100
> Geert Hendrickx <ghen@NetBSD.org> wrote:
>=20
> > > 1) Why not reverse sequence of namings starting with: /pub/ARCH/....?
> > I think this is a good idea.  When people are looking for binary packag=
es,
> > =09/pub/NetBSD/packages/$arch/NetBSD-$version/pkgsrc-$branch.

I'd like to also get rid of having separate NetBSD-3.0, NetBSD 3.1, NetBSD=
=20
3.0.1, etc. And just have a NetBSD-3.x (or NetBSD-3). As it has been=20
confusing to only find a few packages in one location and then be told to=
=20
use seemingly older packages from 3.0.

> I'm still disappointed. Why do you tripple NetBSD name?
>=20
> ftp.NetBSD.org/pub/NetBSD/packages/$arch/NetBSD-$version/...
>     ^^^^^^         ^^^^^^                ^^^^^^

I don't see it as a problem. Also, it does need to be mentioned at least=20
one time (outside of hostname) because the FTP servers sometimes also=20
provide binaries for other (non-NetBSD) operating systems.

By the way, I agree that it can be difficult to find packages. Also part=20
of the confusion is we have symlinks pointing to same packages.

You can see an example of the difficulties in the thread on=20
netbsd-help@NetBSD.org in mid November with subject "Which pkgsrc for=20
NetBSD-3.1"

I think the problems will be cleaned up soon. I was told that some of the=
=20
symlinks will be removed soon and also outdated packages (from two=20
branches previous) will be removed (when replacement -- latest branch) is=
=20
available.
--0-1750024150-1165498794=:28078--