Scripsit Graham Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > However, I am not (nor do I believe a majority might be) that > experimental should duplicate unstable, with only a few packages (the > experimental ones) being newer. However, with the pool structure > archive, this might not actually mean a duplication of too much space.
Well, experimental's Packages file itself would become as large as the one for unstable. Most people would still want to have unstable as well as experimental in their sources.list, because the ride might get too rough if you pulled _everything_ from experimental that there is to pull. For example, one might be willing to help stress-test the packaging of perl6, but not at the same time as stress-testing new glibc packages. At least on my system, synchronizing the Packages file on a daily basis accounts for a significant fraction of the total amortized bandwith I use for tracking unstable, simply because I have to download it in full every day. So inflating experimental/Packages to full distribution size would probably have a measurable effect on mirror load level. -- Henning Makholm "I've been staying out of family conversations. Do I get credit for that?"