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

Re: Multi-arch netinst getting too big

Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> writes:

> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 03:06:14PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 14:30 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>> For the last few builds, the i386/amd64/powerpc sid netinst image has
>>> become too big to fit on one CD any more. The following packages are
>>> falling off onto a second disk now:
>>> i386:main:linux-image-2.6.32-5-686-bigmem:27213342
>>> i386:main:linux-image-2.6-686-bigmem:3036
>>> i386:main:linux-headers-2.6.32-5-686-bigmem:516338
>>> i386:main:linux-headers-2.6-686-bigmem:2930
>>The linux-image ones were added to support installation into a Xen PV
>>domain and were added to this image precisely because it was one of the
>>few images which was considered to have room -- it would be a shame to
>>have to drop them.
> Hmmm, OK.
>>> http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/daily-builds/sid_d-i/20100615-5/multi-arch/list-cd/debian-testing-amd64-i386-powerpc-netinst.list.gz
>>> in case anybody wants to take a look and suggest things...
>>I'm afraid I don't have any good ideas. Is this particular image
>>supposed to contain a complete base system or just enough to fetch the
>>remainder of the base system from the net?
> The netinsts are meant to have the base system, yes. I can't see
> anything obvious myself that we can drop. Maybe time to give up on
> powerpc on that image, like we've done on the m-a DVD. Shame, but
> there's only so much stuff we can accommodate here. Anybody else have
> an opinion here? Frans/Joey?

Just a crcy idea: Could the plain i386 kernel be droped instead? That
would loose support for i486 and i586 cpus on the m-a CD. But is that
needed there?


Reply to: