[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Do we really need the long package description in dpkg/status for D-I?



(Idea based on discussion for #452273)

On Friday 11 January 2008, you wrote:
> Guillem Jover wrote:
> > There's 278 udebs in the current main Packages file. Each Package-Type
> > field takes 19 bytes, so 5282 bytes of bloat. In comparison the
> > Description field takes 49416 bytes. If you are really concerned about
> > "bloat", maybe you could trim those down instead.
>
> We are constantly trimming udeb descriptions.
>
> However, unlike this useless new field, udeb descriptions do have value
> -- they are displayed to the user.

Well, the short description is. But the long description is AFAIK unused in 
D-I.

How about we just ignore the long description when writing the dpkg status 
file for D-I? AFAICT that would require a smallish patch in the libd-i 
function di_package_parser_write_description in src/package_parser.c.

If we don't want to terminally cripple libd-i for this, it could also be 
done only if some environment variable is set.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: