Re: PROPOSAL - REFORMULATED - Create alternative Packages files for each section
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:11:02 -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Based on a previous thread on the same matter, I reformulated the
> proposal I made earlier.
>
> Here it goes:
>
> PROPOSAL:
> Create alternative Packages file for each section
>
> WHY?
>
> Today, the downloading and processing of the entire packages file is a
> problem both for low-bandwidth users and for low-specs computers. In
> fact, the download of the packages file for a modem user can take ~ 15
> minutes, and the processing of this file by apt can take hours on a 486
> 55Mhz with 8Mb RAM and 45Mb swap (self experience, actually I had to
> cancel the processing after two or three hours).
>
> [Snipped the proposal, because my disagreement is with the premise]
In the end, if your 486 can't handle downloading the packages file, how
will it ever handle all of the changed debs it has to download. Don't run
sid on it. Stable gets very few updates, so its packages file should
actually be changed very infrequently (this time around, it only required
only 3 downloads in 2 years). And there shouldn't be anywhere near enough
security updates to bog down the system when that packages file has to be
redownloaded.
--
I usually have a GPG digital signature included as an attachment.
See http://www.gnupg.org/ for info about these digital signatures.
My key was last signed 08/18/2004. If you use GPG *please* see me about
signing the key. ***** My computer can't give you viruses by email. ***
Reply to: