Re: Size of a du index for packages (Complete index = 74 K)
>>"Jules" == Jules Bean <email@example.com> writes:
Jules> The point I'm making is not directly that - it's more to do with (someone
Jules> else's idea) of restricting which directories size information is stored
Jules> A simple partition list, as they suggested, would not be good enough,
Jules> since as sys-admin I'm entitled to stick in a symlink at any depth...
Jules> I wasn't having a go at your script - sorry if it sounded like I was! I
Jules> saying that for correct operation we do need sizes for *every* directory,
Jules> we can't simply list the top two or three levels and guarantee success..
Yes, we need to have the full listing to take care of all the
cases out there. Also, as far as I can see, the size was reduced from
9xk to 7Xk; and we should ask, is the saving in size worth it?
IMHO, a 100K du file is way better than I expected (I still am
interested in seeing how this datum was generated, my off the cuff
calculations indicated a size several times larger).
"It's said that 'power corrupts', but actually it's more true that
power attracts the corruptible. The sane are usually attracted by
other things than power. When they do act, they think of it as
service, which has limits. The tyrant, though, seeks mastery, for
which he is insa- tiable, implacable." David Brin _The Postman_
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org