Re: What kernel stuff on CD1? Was Still no TeX in CD#1
On 29 May 2002, Philip Hands wrote:
> Does anyone have other candidates for a move, or reasons not to move any
> of the packages mentioned above?
These are the popularities in decreasing order:
xserver-xfree86 475 90 41 0
kdelibs3 338 63 42 0
kdebase 274 29 2 6
mozilla-browser 268 44 245 0
gimp1.2 252 151 70 0
emacs21 250 20 9 0
emacs20 232 94 16 0
gnome-applets 198 58 100 0
tuxracer-data 48 123 11 11
emacs20-dl 41 5 1 0
xfonts-base 19 197 8 594
xfonts-100dpi 11 181 5 578
erlang 6 36 2 0
xspecs 0 0 0 210
timidity-patches 0 0 0 321
libopenh323-dbg 0 0 1 0
doc-linux-text 0 0 0 659
aspell-pt 0 0 0 10
aspell-fr 0 0 0 29
aspell-es 0 0 0 15
aspell-de 0 0 0 47
aspell-da 0 0 0 11
The first number is the number of people in the popularity contest who
use the package regularly.
Hmm, I wonder why doc-linux-text has priority standard at all, when so few
people use it regularly... Anyway, I would drop all the aspell packages, plus
libopenh323-dbg, timidity-patches, xspecs, erlang and emacs20-dl.
In case the TeX task would still not fit, it would not be such a
disaster if we put tetex-bin, tetex-base and tetex-extra in the first
CD and the remaining of the TeX task in the second CD.
[ tetex-bin is used regularly by 715 people in the popularity contest ]
Thanks.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cd-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: