Re: PROPOSAL to sarge+1 - Split main in sub-repositories
Steve Greenland <steveg@moregruel.net> writes:
> On 20-Aug-04, 16:22 (CDT), Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
>> Daniel Ruoso wrote:
>> > split main to the sections inside it, in a way to have separated
>> > package files for each section, so I can choose which sections I
>> > don't want at all, like kde and gnome, and maybe even games, or sound
>>
>> Also, if you run up the numbers you will see that there are almost no
>> reasonable combinations of sections to leave out on anything but highly
>> specialized systems that will give you a space saving of say at least
>> 25%.
>
> Actually, I'd been thinking about this, and I'd guess that any machine
> that has problems with the large Packages file *probably* is not running
> X. My thought was to generate a Packages.small that removed xlibs and
> *everything* that depended on it, no matter what section. I've not run
> the numbers to see if that is a substantial reduction, though.
How about making a Packages.small file with non essential fileds
removed. All long descriptions could be removed for example.
> There's two distinct issues, though. One is reducing the download size,
> for machines on slow and/or expensive links. The other is reducing the
> total size of the package database that dpkg et. al. have to deal with,
> for machines that are slow or low-memory. It would be nice to have a
> solution for both.
It would be nice if Packages files would add new packages to the end
instead of alphabetically and if apt-get could use rsync to download
the Packages files (but not the debs). All the slow/never changing
packages would drift to the top and the start of Packages (or
Packages.gz) would remain the same and improve rsyncability.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: