RE: Stop archive bloat: 47MB gmt-coast-full_19991001-1.deb
So ... Just like Irix, we'll have a separate cd for nfs, and a separate cd
for gcc? (heh, sorry, my bad .. I just thought it was funny how Irix is
split up .. we had to pay $25,000 for a compilers license, and they send us
a cd with about 30 meg of data on it .. and that 30 meg covers all the
platforms (only a couple meg per) oh, and we would have to split gcc and g++
up as well .. two separate cds.. and nfs .. jeez .. lets see.. for linux ..
that would be what .. 500k on an entire cd? ;-)
I agree that splitting things up would be good, but it is also nice to have
a single cd with as much on it as possible .. Installing Irix is a major
pain in the a** .. you have to sit there and swap cd's every few minutes
(There's an install tools cd, apps cd, foundation 1/2, nfs, compilers (cc
and c++ are different cds), etc... it sucks when you have to do an install
on a server which is in a different room)..
Yes, Solaris is a single cd, and as mentioned, there are no compilers.. its
a pretty weak distribution .. I believe SCO packs everything on one cd (yet
another os that takes forever to install)..
You also have to remember, as with Irix (and Solaris) a lot of the
commercial OS's like those, what we consider 'basic' parts of the
distribution are not 'free'... on Irix, NFS and Compilers cost $$, so you
don't necssarily get those with the basic distribution (well, I think NFS is
free with 6.5, i don't even know whats what anymore) .. also, having
different cd's allows sgi (or whoever) to upgrade 'parts' of their os in an
intuitive way .. (ie, comes with 'Applications Jan 99', then you can upgrade
to Apps Jun 99, etc... NFS v3.xxx then to NFS v3.1xxx)..
Do whatever's easiest, but don't think you have to 'conform' to how other
'commercial' os's are .. there are different factors involved (really ..
come on .. 30 meg on a cd ? thats like <90 meg across 3 cd's ;-)
my 2c..
Terry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Bristel [mailto:targon@targonia.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 1999 8:52 PM
> To: Kevin Bullock
> Cc: Debian Devel List
> Subject: Re: Stop archive bloat: 47MB gmt-coast-full_19991001-1.deb
>
>
> Well, I don't know the exact number for IRIX, but it's around
> 8-10 CDs I think,
> not all of them full. So Network tools on one, graphics and
> multi-media on
> another, and so on. We tend to have packed CDs where the others
> do not, and the
> others don't mind since they charge large ammounts for their OS.
> Solaris on the
> other hand has only one CD, but it lacks almost all the tools you
> would hope
> for, such as compilers, and libraries. Forget GNU utilities on
> the stuff you
> get on CD from Sun. So, people don't MIND having all those CDs
> as a part of the
> distribution, they just mind the ammount it would take up on a
> hard drive. If
> we decide to split up the dist by function onto different CDs,
> this would follow
> the model most use, but requires that we have a 5 CD set for any
> install that is
> reasonably complete. Or we split more stuff off to new areas like
> contrib-network, contrib-multimedia, etc.
>
> Dave Bristel
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 18 Oct 1999, Kevin Bullock wrote:
>
> > Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 12:39:55 -0500 (CDT)
> > From: Kevin Bullock <kbullock@ringworld.org>
> > To: Debian Devel List <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>
> > Subject: Re: Stop archive bloat: 47MB gmt-coast-full_19991001-1.deb
> > Resent-Date: 18 Oct 1999 17:46:35 -0000
> > Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> > Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ;
> >
> > On Mon, 18 Oct 1999, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On 18 Oct 1999, Philippe Troin wrote:
> > > > Do we really need a 47MB file that will be useful to maybe 10 people
> > > > using Debian (at most) ? We already fill 5+ CDs...
> > > On the same subject, the Debian archive is now 10.8G in size, at the
> > > current rate of growth a majority of the mirrors will likely stop
> > > mirroring non-i386 by the end of next year and if things
> continue in two
> > > release time we will be like 20G big and we won't even be
> able to mirror
> > > it ourselves!
> >
> > The problem that we face compared to a model like Windows or
> MacOS is that
> > we have the operating system plus *all* application software
> housed at the
> > same place. That means we necessarily have a huge archive, if
> we want the
> > same kind of functionality.
> >
> > I don't know how the commercial *nixes handle this, but it seems they
> > distribute things differently from us too.
> >
> > We have advantages over the Windows and Mac models, though. We
> have shared
> > libraries and dependency information that all works much more smoothly
> > than anything they try to do. Just take a look at how many *.dll's each
> > installer for Windows includes. Our system for installing and
> uninstalling
> > packages is much smoother too, if not as idiot-friendly (I think it is
> > user-friendly to a large degree, with room for improvement).
> >
> > So here's my idea. I think we should leave only the stuff that makes up
> > the basics of the OS in main. This would include all of the current
> > Required priority, probably all of Important, probably all of Standard,
> > plus things like X (everything needed for a running X environment,
> > possibly including (part of) GNOME or somesuch), and sections like:
> >
> > o base
> > o admin
> > o relevant parts of doc
> > o maybe part of editors
> > o some or all of libs/oldlibs
> > o perhaps part of mail
> > o parts of misc that have better places to go (cbb,
> kernel-package, screen)
> > o part of net
> > o some of sound
> > o most/all of text
> > o part of utils
> > o part of web
> > o parts of x11 (see above)
> >
> > Then we distribute that as one CD set. This would generally include
> > everything you'd expect to find on a commercial *nix distribution CD,
> > maybe pruned a bit (my educational copy of Solaris 7 fits on 1 CD +
> > 1 more of documentation).
> >
> > Next we create the data section according to current policy, along with
> > creating a new section (or maybe a few new sections) for applications.
> > Data would include what's already been discussed. Applications would
> > include things like:
> >
> > o WINE
> > o XEmacs, other emacsen
> > o maybe a good portion of GNOME (if not all)
> > o all of games
> > o most of devel and interpreters (all the -dev pkgs, all the stuff not
> > necessary for compiling downloaded source. This might also go in a
> > separate development section)
> > o all of graphics
> > o parts of libs that aren't required by stuff in main
> > o math
> > o most of mail
> > o a fair portion of net
> > o some of sound
> > o all of tex (teTeX and all the fineries)
> >
> > Then we distribute basically each section as a separate CD set, with the
> > option to get all of them.
> >
> > There's several hurdles to doing this:
> > o It would require major policy changes.
> > o Perhaps the most difficult part.
> > o it would require significant, though not major, changes to
> > dselect/apt/console-apt/whatever.
> > o This would mainly include just UI changes, to print
> sections prettier.
> > console-apt currently only shows base, admin, etc., not
> non-US/base, etc.
> > o it would require changing the sections of a lot of packages, and even
> > moreso changing priorities of a lot of packages.
> > o This would be a major hurdle to overcome.
> > o it would require an increase in hardware capabilities by our servers
> > (maybe mirrors too -- but they could just mirror one section each if
> > they wanted)
> > o Maybe we start apps.debian.org, main.debian.org, data.debian.org to
> > handle each section. Maybe even set them up as a
> round-robin system of
> > mirrors.
> > o it would complicate our distribution methods and our installer.
> > o Maybe have each CD have its own installer.
> > o The multi_cd method (of dselect or apt) would have to be smooth (I
> > don't see them as real smooth currently).
> >
> > But there's advantages:
> > o it would enable us to keep packaging everyone's favorite software
> > packages for debian to make software accessible to anyone
> > o it would make it easier for people to say "I want these components for
> > this system" and buy CDs for just those components, without having to
> > get stuff they didn't want just laying around.
> > o It makes more sense to me to do it this way -- better organized than
> > currently.
> >
> > This would definitely be an eventual goal, but I release the idea for
> > discussion. I'm aware of many of the downfalls of actually doing it, but
> > feel free to discuss it, reject it if you so desire.
> >
> > --Kevin R. Bullock
> >
> > kbullock@ringworld.org | TheMystic@EFNet
> > krbullock@csbsju.edu | Caoimhin@EFNet
> >
> > "One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad
> > "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer" - Adolf Hitler
> >
> >
> > --
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmaster@lists.debian.org
> >
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
Reply to: