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

Re: ash splitting and Herbert Xu (Fw: Bug#97310 acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#97310: More package-splitting stupidity))



On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 08:04:41AM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 06:10:49AM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > Kernel-image:
> > 	* Unnecessary bloat, which doesn't help mirrors already having
> > trouble with load (especially aarnet).
> > 	* Lengthens kernel-image dpkg-buildpackage time.
> > 	* If people want to squeeze that extra percent out of their PC, they
> > should compile the kernel themselves. What next, one xmms package for every
> > flavour of i386, specifically optimised to give you that 1% extra?
> > 
> > Hell, there's an entire *thread* about this. 
> 
> Fine. Send some good reasons in to the BTS.

 	* Unnecessary bloat, which doesn't help mirrors already having
 trouble with load (especially aarnet).
 	* Unnecessary bloat, which doesn't help mirrors already having
 trouble with load (especially aarnet).
 	* Unnecessary bloat, which doesn't help mirrors already having
 trouble with load (especially aarnet).
 	* Unnecessary bloat, which doesn't help mirrors already having
 trouble with load (especially aarnet).
 	* Unnecessary bloat, which doesn't help mirrors already having
 trouble with load (especially aarnet).
	* Encourages useless package-splitting.
	* Bloats Packages, even.
	* Generally crap.

The BTS can go read the thread. The BTS can read the replies. If the BTS
actually cares. Did I mention the bloat?
 
> > Seeing as it all comes down to a difference of opinion and it *is* a rather
> > serious issue, I see no reason why TC shouldn't look at it.
> 
> TC should be a last resort. There's no reason to involve them in every
> squabble on debian-devel.

This is a reasonably large squabble - both in terms of the argument and the
bloat it's over. We're not talking about a matter of 5k here, we're talking
a lot of megs. I'd personally see Athlon people either have to a) compile
their own kernel or b) lose all of 1% performance on a really bad day, as
opposed to c) having fucked-up mirrors all over the place[1].

> > Unnecessary package splitting is just plain evil, anyway.
> 
> I don't see why. Modularity is good. There's not THAT much overhead
> per package anyway, afaik.

Are you actually sure what you're talking about here? There is NO modularity
whatsoever involved in the kernel-* bloat. It's DUPLICATION. I'm all for
modularity (I have ulogd split into ulogd, ulogd-mysql and ulogd-pgsql - so
a logging daemon doesn't depend on mysql and/or pgsql, pgsql in non-us is
delaying its upload), but duplication just plain sucks.

[1] At the time of the thread, both mirror.aarnet.edu.au and
ftp.au.debian.org had badly out-of-sync Packages files and actual packages -
I had to download about half of that dist-upgrade run via http.us, which is
painful when you're only on ISDN.

-- 
Daniel Stone
daniel@kabuki.openfridge.net



Reply to: