Re: GCC 3.2 transition
>> rmurray@debian.org writes:
> > is probably upwards biased). This would represent a 2% increase
> > in the number of packages (1 GB increase in the archive size? 400
> > kB average size for a library package? Sounds ok, we have some
> > pretty large
>
> 1 GB*12 active archs in unstable == 12GB. Doesn't sound OK to take
> the debian mirror from ~60GB to ~72GB. Unless you are volunteering
> to buy 4 terabytes of disk space for our mirrors...
Uhm...
2% * 55 GB is what gave me that 1 GB figure. I thought that should
have been obvious, sorry. It's 1 GB total, not 1 GB per architecture.
> Now, if we just did a subset of libraries that we have actual
> examples of being needed, that might be something to consider. We
> probably won't know what these libraries are until they stop working
> for people in sarge, however...
I don't think I understand what you mean in that last sentence.
--
Marcelo | One of the universal rules of happiness is: always
mmagallo@debian.org | be wary of any helpful item that weighs less than its
| operating manual.
| -- (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)
Reply to: