Re: Bug#704782: trilinos: new package for Trilinos 11.x

[Felix Salfelder <felix@salfelder.org>]

Hi Graham.

On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 01:06:38PM +0200, Graham Inggs wrote:
> Ultimately, the decision lies with ftpmaster whether this package
> will be accepted, and they will ask 'Is there a valid reason to
> provide a new binary package?', see 'Checks for new binary packages'
> [2].

thanks for these references.

to keep it simple, i don't know what to do. upstream partitions their
work, it seems reasonable, and i can't think of a better way. my
expectation is, that a reverse dependency will actually only require a
tiny fraction of the whole.

lets fetch some numbers (please order more numbers, if you can think of
relevant ones).

$ ls libtrilinos-*12.2.1*.deb | wc -l
90
$ du -s libtrilinos-*12.2.1*.deb | cut -f1 -d' ' | sort -h | tail -n 10
912
924
1064
1096
1376
1568
1944
2644
2960
7596
$ for i in libtrilinos-*12.2.1*.deb; do dpkg -I $i | grep Installed-Size | \
  cut -d' ' -f3 ; done | sort -h | tail -n 10
4865
4913
5005
7171
7566
10682
12912
19051
20403
47295 # <= I guess, this means 47MB

for comparison (to get an idea, i do not claim an analogy).

$ apt-cache search python | grep ^python | wc -l
3965
$ apt-cache search ruby | grep ^ruby- | wc -l
910
$ apt-cache search r-cran | grep ^r-cran | wc -l
279
$ apt-cache search boost | grep ^libboo | wc -l
153

hth
felix