Re: Bits from the debian-cd team; more CD/DVDs being built regularly
On 12/20/06, Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> wrote:
Gustavo Franco wrote:
> Unfortunately, even the GNOME desktop environment doesn't fit on the
> CD#1.
True, but enough does fit to have a basically useable gnome desktop.
Right, but we need to make it clear for the users and the first line
of them are subscribed to -devel. ;)
> You will need broadband connection to fetch some more packages
> or use the full DVD#1 for your architecture. The bonus is that KDE
> will be there too (full DVD #1). I'm not sure about the latest
> statistics on KDE and XFCE alternative desktop CD#1. Joey, could you
> give us that information?
All of kde doesn't fit on the kde CD, the key packages for the task do.
I expect that all of xfce will fit on its CD, but as its CD is currently
apparently broken and doesn't include much of anything, I'm not yet
sure.
Do you know what's broken in Xfce cd? Is it tasksel related? I hope not.
> >those 3 arches, roughly equivalent to the contents of the first 3-4
> >CDs or so each. Binary-all package overlaps mean that there is space
> >on this disc for more packages than might be expected. Plus, sources
> >for all the binaries on the DVD will be included too. This DVD is
> >therefore probably the ideal choice of disc to sell or give away at
> >Expos.
>
> Does it contains desktop, kde-desktop, gnome-desktop and xfce-desktop?
> I guess not, but who knows. ;)
I don't know yet, it might since IIRC kde starts around CD 3 or 4 of the
regular CD set.
Sounds great, could you give me a link with the log or check it in the
next build please?
> I would like to suggest 'split' the 9 archs left in 3, something like:
> - arm, mips, mipsel
Not enough machines for these arches with CD drives to be useful, I think.
You've a point.
> - hppa, ia64, s390
AFAIK the use cases for s390 CDs are very limited and don't include
booting, so it's not needed.
I'm sure they're, so can't we go for a new multiarch containing hppa
and ia64 only or even i386, hppa and ia64 ?
regards,
-- stratus
Reply to: