On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 11:06:36AM +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 09:36:32AM +0300, Eray Aslan wrote: > >> 1/ Static allocation does not really solve a problem. Not really not > >> nowadays > >> 2/ We cant keep adding new IDs to a distribution as new software gets > >> added - one side is unbounded. This is losing game. > > Not sure. In practice, the number of packages is limited. (And if the > argument was valid, it would apply to dynamic alloction too.)
In the static allocation option, the rate of increase is the rate of new ID-needing software ported to the tree minus - optimistically - the rate of treecleaning similar software. Optimistic because I am not sure how much, or at what point, do we want to re-use treecleaned IDs. In the dynamic case, we dont care about the global status and are really bound by the max number of sysem IDs installed in a single system. Local maximum is rather stable and in any case is a lot smaller than global maximum. Plus in this age of containers and namespaces, this isnt really a problem even if it did grow over time, i.e. even if unbounded, we have tools to manage it. -- Eray
