Re: should we split up the Packages file in main (for woody)
On Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 02:38:37PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On Sun, 13 Feb 2000, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>
> > > ok, lets face it.. the packages file in slink is something like <500K
> > > (in i386) in potato its >800K.. i think it might be time to start
> > > splitting it up...
>
> > Lets wait for package pools, which should help with this as well.
>
> Why? It will make things worse because there will be more package+versions
> avaiable!
actually.. what is the purpose of package-pools, i have seen the directory there why what is it's purpose (or what will it be)
> I think the correct thing to do here is to have a pair of package files,
> 'Sunday' and 'today' - 'today' would contain anything new since 'sunday'
> and once a week or so 'sunday' would rebuild completely. If removals of
> versions were coordinated with the sunday roll over then this would work
> perfectly. That would require package pools (or a big dinstall overhall)
> Clients would just download both.
this seems like even better idea... but still i think we should have a parseable list of (official) download sites.
this would ease up setting up APT and other software that uses libapt.
you actually cant expect a beginner/end user which has just moved from some other OS to just go and edit /etc/apt/sources.list to suite his/her needs, i think we all know how easily they can be frightened away...
--
get a life, get the second one free...
Reply to: