broken INDEX

[Dominic Fandrey]

RW wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 11:52:39 +0200
> Dominic Fandrey <kamikaze at bsdforen.de> wrote:
> 
> 
>> This is not the first time this has happened and I'm wondering, is
>> this a bug in Tinderbox? Shouldn't packages listed in the INDEX
>> always be available?
>> ...
>> So I think packages should really only be listed in the INDEX if
>> they are available and only deleted AFTER they have been removed
>> from the INDEX.
> 
> 
> The INDEX file is information about the current ports tree, and it has
> to match the current tree. It's used by portupgrade, pkg_version,
> portversion, and a few minor make targets to speed things up. 
> 
> INDEX has little to do with package files, not all packages listed in
> INDEX are even packaged.

Umm...

no.

The index file in the ports tree is what you are talking about.
I'm talking about the INDEX file provided by a package build
server (like tinderbox), which only contains entries about ports
actually available as binary packages.

This is a mirroring problem (at least I assume it is).
On ftp://ftp.freebsd.org the INDEX is consistent with the available
packages.

To fix this a mirror would have to update in the following way:
1) Download the new INDEX into a temporary location.
2) Download all packages listed in the new index file.
3) Overwrite the old INDEX with the new one.
4) Delete all packages no longer listed.