Re: [SPAM] Re: why is amd64 still separate?
Regarding: Except that the first I described sounds an awful lot like
Ubuntu ...
Warning: Newby to this list, and new owner and experimenter with an HP
Pavilion zv6201cl (AMD64 Athlon 3200+ (2.0 GHz), with 512 MB RAM).
Yes, that does _sound_ like Ubuntu. I have discovered there must be some
secret sauce with which the Ubuntu people douse their releases. I have
found it impossible to set the network interface to default to the
dial-up (ppp0) using the Gnomish "Networking" applet. Then trying to
drill down to the /etc/network/interfaces file does not work either. My
next try will be to hack around with the pppd configuration files.
So, I would expect the Debian releases to be without any secret sauce.
Except for hardware differences, I would expect the releases for each
architecture to adhere to the FHS and be similar in methods of
configuration. I am still having difficulty wrapping my brain around the
change to resolve.conf (/etc/resolvconf/...), but I think I understand
the goal from the reasoning set forth in the documentation.
Regarding splitting the archives: it has taken eight days (640 kb/s DSL)
to build my local Debian AMD64 mirror. I also keep a local mirror for
the i386 architecture. I use these mirrors to install and update half a
dozen computers. It is much faster than the Internet even when I have a
DSL or cable connection.
So far, I have installed a Debian release about five times on the HP
laptop since I bought it on the 25th of November. After the third
attempt (from the Internet DSL) I decided I needed to mirror the AMD64
distribution. I will probably keep them separate locally on my external
USB hard disk.
I did not want to mirror all the architectures because of the time it
takes to keep it up-to-date. I have been doing an up-date once a week,
but AKLUG now has a mirror for several distributions which may include
Debian, so I will be able to update faster once a week.
There are many i386 boxen and a few amd64 boxen around here in the
Alaska Linux Users Group (AKLUG). The Macintosh folks seem to be
satisfied with OSX and do not come around to our meetings. No one I know
has an IBM 360, ARM, or any of the other architectures with the
exception of reports of ancient Sun workstations in use.
I might combine the i386 and amd64 mirrors in the future when the amd64
distribution hits the regular mirrors. In any case, I am delighted with
Debian, and I am looking forward to seeing the amd64 included as a
regular distribution.
Gruess!
Adam Stiles wrote:
> On Tuesday 06 December 2005 13:15, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
>>Matthias Julius <lists@julius-net.net> writes:
>>
>>>Hamish Moffatt <hamish@debian.org> writes:
>>>
>>>>It's deemed necessary to split the archive into popular/less-popular
>>>>architectures before any more can be added -- not just amd64. The
>>>>current single archive is too big for mirrors. That work is in progress.
>>>
>>>I don't understand the problem there. Each mirror already can decide
>>>which architectures to mirror.
>>>
>>>Matthias
>>
>>The first argument is: All primary mirrors must have all archs.
>>
>>The second: Excluding archs is to hard for mirror admins, they will
>>drop debian complety instead of excluding archs.
>>
>>
>>Both arguments I can't agree with and some primary mirrors already
>>droped archs. But that were the reasons given.
>>
>>MfG
>> Goswin
>
>
> I can see real benefits in the idea of supporting many architectures, but of
> course this means more to look after. Problems with a package on one
> architecture can hold up its release in other architectures. It's all rather
> like cooking a big meal: the more items you have on the stove, the harder it
> gets to time everything so it all comes ready at once.
>
> I believe there is a place for a distribution which supports just the most
> popular architectures -- 80686, AMD64 and PowerPC perhaps -- with regular
> releases; alongside a distribution which supports the "minority"
> architectures and is more meticulously checked to be sure it runs well on on
> all of them, even to the extent of holding up a release while issues are
> settled.
>
> Except that the first I described sounds an awful lot like Ubuntu .....
>
--
Fielder George Dowding, Chief Iceworm .^. Debian/GNU Linux
dba Iceworm Enterprises, Anchorage, Alaska /v\ "etch" Testing
Since 1976 - Over 25 Years of Service. /( )\ User Number 269482
^^-^^ "irad" 301256
Reply to: