Re: Ye Olde optimization/mirror disk space debate
Richard Braakman <dark@xs4all.nl> writes:
> On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 11:45:24AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > Once again, we tell mirrors that they can mirror only i386, and that
> > would be fine. We already have mirrors that mirror some arches and
> > not others, right?
>
> Currently we have a good, solid mirror infrastructure. I can expect
> to find one or more full, up-to-date mirrors in my country or a
> neighbouring country, and I don't even have to look them up --
> I just try ftp.*.debian.org, possibly ftp1.*.debian.org, where
> the * is a country code.
>
> You propose to fragment that and make users play hunt-the-right-mirror
> every time they configure apt. For what benefit?
No. I propose making the solution easy for users and more mirror
operators. I can think of several options right off the bat.
Moreover, I expect that most mirrors won't skip a beat.
Regardless, I have no objection to phasing such things in slowly, as
well. Perhaps we wouldn't need both 386 and 486.
Perhaps it would be useful to have the easy-local-build variant, since
that's a prereq anyway, and it would enable the creation of ready
statistics so that the value of optimization can be demonstrated.
Reply to: