Re: Packaging _still_ wasteful for many large packages
Quoting Steve McIntyre (firstname.lastname@example.org):
> In article <20040216210207.GC1586@tintin> you write:
> >On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 09:33:23AM +0000, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >> Yes, good point. I'll make sure to check if the packages I'm looking
> >> at are in woody before posting bugs.
> >I think that you should also check that they are not single-arch (such
> >as eagle), as splitting such packages would only bloat the Packages file
> >with no gain for the mirrors.
> So why is Eagle a large i386-only package with i386 binaries in
> /usr/share? This is ridiculous - surely that's a bug in and of itself!
Pehaps because you might want to share /usr/share or at least parts of that
amongst several machines in a network ?