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

Re: package lists for older machines

> Thus, there ought to be a database for "Debian lite" -- only those
> packages that would make sense on a slower machine.  For example, this
> list would not have any of the mp3, DVD, kde, or gnome packages.  It
> think this would be an extremely useful addition to the Debian system.

As this could be done with just a new Packages.gz file, this shouldn't
be a big problem technically.
But i do not think this will work out: it will be very hard to find a
consensus on what software belongs into this "lite" version.
A P166 should be a great mp3 player, but gnome probably is overkill...
So you'll need another Packages.gz for mp3-players, another for servers
(which do not need gnome ;) usw.
Of course any Distributor is encouraged to do this by putting the
Packages on appropriate CDs... so Servers use CDs 1+2, Clients CDs 1+3,
Lite machines only CD 1...

For example, i had a "thin" client running here; just a mini
installation on a windows pc. Then people wanted to play mp3s under
linux, so an mp3 player was added; then a local browser was added
(actually galeon runs surprisingly good on a P200 with few ram...)
So i fear that you cannot find a consensus which packages should go into
a "mini" Packages.gz; i personally want to get rid of the "Section"
field and generating individual Packages.gz for keywords would be plain
crazy i think (too much overlaps)...
Maybe some kind of sectioning would be good for splitting the
Packages.gz; such as "music" "graphics" "xserver" "webserver" ?
Argl... that will be really difficult. Something like Tasks. Task's
contain only the important packages, Sections contain all that fit;
they probably should be "in sync" then?


BTW: What about a packages.gz stripped off it's Descriptions? For people
with access to other machines running debian, this could be interesting.

How is the current state with the translated packages.gz files?
I'm already using some german mirror providing the translated
descriptions; is there some decision how this will be managed on the
mirrors? As i understand there is not yet a policy for including
translated descriptions in packages; what is the current state btw?

I think we need some infrastructure for generating different Packages.gz
files anyway. We already do have the translated Packages.gz files, so
maybe we should finally organizes this and write a policy...


Reply to: