I don't have a strong opinion but feel that the standard apt layout is quite nice. rpm http://$BASEURL <OS>/<ARCH> <STATUS> The <OS> depends on the host operating system it can be sl3.0.5 or sl4.4.0. The <ARCH> depends on the host hardware version it can be i386 or x86_64. The <STATUS> finally determines the version you will get. I must support 3 platforms this translates to a directory structure like sl4.4.0/x86_64 sl4.4.0/x86_64/RPMS.unstable sl4.4.0/x86_64/RPMS.unstable/headers sl4.4.0/x86_64/RPMS.unstable/repodata sl4.4.0/x86_64/SRPMS.unstable sl4.4.0/x86_64/SRPMS.unstable/repodata sl4.4.0/x86_64/SRPMS.testing sl4.4.0/x86_64/SRPMS.testing/repodata sl4.4.0/x86_64/RPMS.stable sl4.4.0/x86_64/RPMS.stable/headers sl4.4.0/x86_64/RPMS.stable/repodata sl4.4.0/x86_64/SRPMS.stable sl4.4.0/x86_64/SRPMS.stable/repodata sl4.4.0/x86_64/base sl4.4.0/x86_64/RPMS.testing sl4.4.0/x86_64/RPMS.testing/headers sl4.4.0/x86_64/RPMS.testing/repodata sl4.4.0/x86_64/RPMS.tools sl4.4.0/x86_64/RPMS.tools/headers sl4.4.0/x86_64/RPMS.tools/repodata sl4.4.0/x86_64/SRPMS.tools sl4.4.0/x86_64/SRPMS.tools/repodata and repeated for other OS's and architectures. So on test hosts I often have an apt string as rpm http://$BASEURL <OS>/<ARCH> stable testing tools while developers have rpm http://$BASEURL <OS>/<ARCH> unstable tools and production has rpm http://$BASEURL <OS>/<ARCH> stable This may not be relevant to your discussion but its nice to see a layout that makes <OS>/<ARCH>/<STATUS> distinctions in a clear hierarchy. I don't see why you should not use the same hierarchy for contrib and errata and updates as we use for stable, testing, unstable and tools. To me this is just cosmetic and I don't really care how its done as long as its available I am bias to what ever causes you the least work, and if you change things you will I assume document them, and make hopefully make things simpler. Regards Owen On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 09:27:34 -0500 Troy Dawson <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Marc W. Mengel wrote: > > > >> Currently, SL 3.x and 4.x has the directory structure > >> > >> 4.4/i386/errata > >> 4.4/i386/contrib > >> 4.4/i386/SL/RPMS > >> > >> Where everything is pushed up into the arch directory. CentOS has > >> things at > >> > >> 4.4/contrib/i386 > >> 4.4/updates/i386 > >> 4.4/os/i386/CentOS/RPMS > >> > > > > I think generally pushing the architecture type differences deeper (i.e. > > the CentOS layout) is easier to follow. In fact, it would be, from that > > perspective, nicer to do > > 4.4/SL/RPMS/i386 > > but that's just me :-) > > > > Marc > I think that would require a whole rewrite of the installer. The > installer needs it's supporting structure, so you put all that stuff > under /os/ > But I'll put you down as a vote of yes of the change for SL5 > > Troy > -- > __________________________________________________ > Troy Dawson [log in to unmask] (630)840-6468 > Fermilab ComputingDivision/LCSI/CSI DSS Group > __________________________________________________