> IOW, it doesn't (directly) give meaningful predictions about the rate > at which a given piece of hardware becomes obsolete. > > It also has no capacity to predict an organization's *ability* to > replace hardware. ok, true > > I'm aware that more's law is not appliable on some archs (like arm > > I believe) but the question is, well, who uses openoffice.org or > > kde on an arm (only to cite those) ? > > This mitigates the linear growth of the archive itself (assuming we > did subset the archive for slower archs), but it doesn't mitigate the > growth of software complexity that causes subsequent revisions of the > same software to run slower on the same hardware over time -- which, > if it's true of nothing else, is at least true of compilers. hmmm, if you don't give such monsters like openoffice or any big c++ application to build on slow/rare arches, I guess that will ease the autobuilders a lot too, not only the archive. maybe the solution is to write a Debian@Home (like Seti@home or Folding@home does) in order to ease the autobuilders :D (kidding of course) -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgpTGRFnSy4AC.pgp
Description: PGP signature