Re: CPU specific binaries
Subject: Re: CPU specific binaries
> On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 02:34:43PM +1000, Glenn McGrath wrote:
> > Archive bloat.... i thought debian was about giving the user the choice
of
> > what they wanted rather them presenting them with subset of whats
available.
> > I feel silly even sugesting this, but why not have official binaries for
> > other cpu's, its the only way they would get widespread use.
> > Possible reasons
> > 1) Archive bloat
> > Storage is cheap ($22 per GB where i am), mirrors should be able to
handle
> > this, thats what there all about.
> > CD's are cheap, a coupla dollars
> >
> > 2) Bandwidth of mirrors
> > Mirrors could JUST mirror the 386 packages if they didnt consider others
> > worthy, its there choice
>
> You are missing the point. The 48MB coastline data file is just the
beginning,
> if we continue to allow packges of unlimited size and limited general
utility.
> What happens when I decide to upload a package of 10 2-hour long Linux
training
> videos I made in MPEG format? Well, everyone has to buy another disk.
Are
> you volunteering, becuase disk space is _so_ cheap?
>
Are you opposed to the idea of having a data section ?
If its organsied correctly there is no reason why mirrrors cant just
download what they think is worthy.
> Again, the problem isn't how little disk space we have. The problem is
the
> increasingly low utility/size ratio of many packages.
>
> --
In the email your responding to i clarified that those are two points ive
concluded about debian from being on the lists for a short time. So you
quite reasonable flame me for not know whats "cosher"
For me as a debian user, debian is a distribution that provides as much as
it can without passing values on what particular programs you should or
shouldnt have in you linux distro.
For example how many linux distributions come with multiple ftp servers,
debian will only install one of them (i think im right here, the old one
gets uninstalled).
No one person is ever going to use ALL the programs that come with debian.
The only problem with limiting debian to "usefull" (ie low utility/size
ratio) packages is that you have to make judgements on other peoples values.
Im not saying that you should be able to make your two hour video. But i
cant see why you couldnt have some stub package that does any configuration
required, and makes reference to the fact that you have to download the
massive data file seperatly. If you can convice a mirror operator to put it
in a debian "data" section, or if the mirror operator whanted to support
your massive file, then whats wrong with that?
To clarify my opinion, size isnt important unless you are forced or
otherwise feel compelled to mirror packages that have a low utility/size
ratio.
Its just a matter of organisation to segragate low utility/size ratio so
people get to choose what they want on the hard disk they own/maintain.
I hope my opinion is of some value to you, im only trying to help.
Reply to: