Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2006-01-20 Thread Ron Johnson
On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 20:49 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [snip] > (And really, data about which mirrors would be dropped would help: > maybe we can buy *them* a disk. Disks are cheap!) Unless the shelf is full, there's no more plugs left

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2006-01-19 Thread Thomas Bushnell BSG
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The problem also isn't our machines but some mirror in > low-diskspace-land. The amount of disk it takes to carry a complete Debian copy is simply going to be increasing. We have to tradeoff dropping a mirror or two against the costs of weakenin

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2006-01-19 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Spare disk space isn't available to add amd64 to mirrors. >> Spare bandwith isn't available to add amd64 to mirrors. > > I see. Can we please have the numbers? Exactly how much disk space > is

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2006-01-17 Thread Michelle Konzack
Am 2005-12-28 22:33:10, schrieb Benjamin Seidenberg: > Seriously? Where? I live in the states, and we pay approx. $50/month > (600 USD/year) for residential DSL (I think, parents pay the bill). > That's a 1.5m down/512k up pipe, with horrible reliability (alltel > sucks). Where can I get the fi

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2006-01-06 Thread Matthew Garrett
Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you need to pay 450.000 DHs (42.000 ¤) for an E3 of 34 MBit > which give you maximum 20-24 MBit because the Infrastructure is > to bad in Morocco then it IS expensive. No. Based on what you've said, the price is the same regardless of whether you d

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2006-01-06 Thread Michelle Konzack
Am 2005-12-27 16:04:42, schrieb Florian Weimer: > * Michelle Konzack: > > > Because we do not get 34 MBit and we have not a netload > > of 100% 24/7 the price per GByte is around 50 US$/GByte. > > This means you still have plenty capacity you've already paid for, > supporting Steinar's claim that

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2006-01-04 Thread Christian Leber
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:31:26PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > Afaict from the webpage 7zip (LZMA) is quite a bit slower bzip2. - > > Have you perhaps run some benchmarks? > Memory use during decompression would be interesting, too. For pure lzma it isn't really bad, it's about 100kb + direct

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2006-01-04 Thread Thomas Bushnell BSG
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Spare disk space isn't available to add amd64 to mirrors. > Spare bandwith isn't available to add amd64 to mirrors. I see. Can we please have the numbers? Exactly how much disk space is needed? Perhaps we can simply go ahead and buy more disks

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-29 Thread Darren Salt
I demand that Benjamin Seidenberg may or may not have written... [snip] > I read 120.000 as 120 dollars, I'm not used to the European '.' as the > seperator, but the US ','. Hmm? You'd better file a bug against locales wrt en_GB, then ;-) -- | Darren Salt | nr. Ashington, | linux (or ds) at |

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-28 Thread John Hasler
Michelle writes: > I heared (on debian-isp) that in the USA you can get a BGP4 routed STM4 > (622MBit) Fiber Optic for only 120.000 US$ PER YEAR !!! Benjamin writes: > Where can I get the fiber optic for $10/year? I think you meant to write $10/month. However, Michelle is European and uses '.' w

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-28 Thread Benjamin Seidenberg
Benjamin Seidenberg wrote: Michelle Konzack wrote: Please not, that I had berween 12/1999 and 12/2004 a contract with a Parisian ISP for a OC-3 and Hosting of one 19" Rack (210cm, 600kg). I have payed including unlimited traffic 499.998 French Francs (76.000 Euro) per month and my own Class-C

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-28 Thread Benjamin Seidenberg
Michelle Konzack wrote: Please not, that I had berween 12/1999 and 12/2004 a contract with a Parisian ISP for a OC-3 and Hosting of one 19" Rack (210cm, 600kg). I have payed including unlimited traffic 499.998 French Francs (76.000 Euro) per month and my own Class-C Block registered at RIPE. I

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-27 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 02:17 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >> Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> > On Sun, 25 Dec 2005, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >> > >> >> > debs are created by debian/rules. So, only dependencies of dpkg would >> >> >

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-27 Thread Florian Weimer
* Michelle Konzack: > Because we do not get 34 MBit and we have not a netload > of 100% 24/7 the price per GByte is around 50 US$/GByte. This means you still have plenty capacity you've already paid for, supporting Steinar's claim that bandwidth is cheap. Just think about it. 8-) -- To UNSUBS

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-27 Thread Florian Weimer
* Michelle Konzack: > Am 2005-12-22 16:04:45, schrieb Florian Weimer: > >> With traffic included? How's that more than 10$ per gigabyte >> transferred and month? 8-) > > IF you can reach 34 Mbit! > > My old colo E3 at UUnet in Kehl/Germany was 5000 Euro/month > plus traffic of >

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-27 Thread Olaf van der Spek
On 12/27/05, Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 57.000 US$/month / 10 US$/GB = 5700 GB/month > > 5700 GB/month / 30,4 days / 24 h / 3600 sec = 2,22 MByte/second > > 2,22 MByte/Second ~ 28 MBit 12.6 bit/byte? > Because we do not get 34 MBit and we have not a netload > of 100% 24/7 the p

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-27 Thread Michelle Konzack
Am 2005-12-22 16:04:45, schrieb Florian Weimer: > * Michelle Konzack: > > > Am 2005-12-19 09:56:27, schrieb Olaf van der Spek: > > > >> Are you paying > 10 $/gb? > >> Where is it that expensive? > > > > I pay 450.000 DHs (around 57.000 US$) in Morocco > > for an E3 (34 MBit) with traffic included.

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-27 Thread Michelle Konzack
Am 2005-12-22 16:31:57, schrieb Olaf van der Spek: > On 12/21/05, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Are you paying > 10 $/gb? > > > > Heck yes, you can't get it that cheap unless you have no SLA (or one > > of those insulting SLAs that come with residential service, claiming > > that

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-27 Thread Michelle Konzack
Am 2005-12-22 16:04:45, schrieb Florian Weimer: > With traffic included? How's that more than 10$ per gigabyte > transferred and month? 8-) IF you can reach 34 Mbit! My old colo E3 at UUnet in Kehl/Germany was 5000 Euro/month plus traffic of as Reseller and End-User

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-26 Thread Ron Johnson
On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 02:17 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Sun, 25 Dec 2005, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > > >> > debs are created by debian/rules. So, only dependencies of dpkg would > >> > have to > >> > be modified. > >> > >> I was talki

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-26 Thread Adam Heath
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > No, the packages themselves would include such logic in their debian/rules. > > There's no way we'd want to keep buildds in sync with what the set of core > > packages is. > > That would realy defeat the purpose of not having to modify every deb

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-26 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, 25 Dec 2005, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > >> > debs are created by debian/rules. So, only dependencies of dpkg would >> > have to >> > be modified. >> >> I was talking about the hypothetical situation of dpkg defaulting to >> !gzip compression an

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-25 Thread Adam Heath
On Sun, 25 Dec 2005, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > debs are created by debian/rules. So, only dependencies of dpkg would have > > to > > be modified. > > I was talking about the hypothetical situation of dpkg defaulting to > !gzip compression and adding a Pre-Depends to the dpkg version > requ

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-25 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, 24 Dec 2005, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > >> It would require some buildd hacking to get it to use gzip only for >> those few debs so more human power. > > debs are created by debian/rules. So, only dependencies of dpkg would have to > be modified

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-24 Thread Adam Heath
On Sat, 24 Dec 2005, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > It would require some buildd hacking to get it to use gzip only for > those few debs so more human power. debs are created by debian/rules. So, only dependencies of dpkg would have to be modified. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-23 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
Andrew Suffield wrote: > As a general rule, UK bandwidth prices are roughly five to ten times > those of equivalent service in other EU countries. Not that you can > get equivalent service. Ouch. I pay less than that for a T1 to my house, and far far far less for bandwidth at a colo. I suggest th

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-23 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > #include > * Goswin von Brederlow [Wed, Dec 21 2005, 04:19:56PM]: > >> > Actual maintainer of dpkg is evaluating the possibility to use 7zip. >> > Even if the decision of using 7zip by default is far from being taken, it >> > looks >> > likely that dpkg

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-23 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 16:12 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >> "Steinar H. Gunderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:34:56PM +0100, Gürkan Sengün wrote: > [snip] >> The transition itself would go completly unadminister

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-22 Thread Eduard Bloch
#include * Goswin von Brederlow [Wed, Dec 21 2005, 04:19:56PM]: > > Actual maintainer of dpkg is evaluating the possibility to use 7zip. > > Even if the decision of using 7zip by default is far from being taken, it > > looks > > likely that dpkg will at least start supporting it. > > > > Cheers,

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-22 Thread Eduard Bloch
#include * Goswin von Brederlow [Wed, Dec 21 2005, 05:03:41PM]: > > $ uncompressor > > -bash: uncompressor: command not found > > > > This solution doesn't look usable in scripts and user have to use a > > more complex syntax. > > You have to replace uncompressor with whatever tool is the right

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-22 Thread Olaf van der Spek
On 12/21/05, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Are you paying > 10 $/gb? > > Heck yes, you can't get it that cheap unless you have no SLA (or one > of those insulting SLAs that come with residential service, claiming > that it doesn't have to work at all). And you can't get that at all

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-22 Thread Florian Weimer
* Michelle Konzack: > Am 2005-12-19 09:56:27, schrieb Olaf van der Spek: > >> Are you paying > 10 $/gb? >> Where is it that expensive? > > I pay 450.000 DHs (around 57.000 US$) in Morocco > for an E3 (34 MBit) with traffic included. With traffic included? How's that more than 10$ per gigabyte tr

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-22 Thread Michelle Konzack
Am 2005-12-19 09:56:27, schrieb Olaf van der Spek: > > I wish we could get it that cheap for my day job. What we have to pay > > to get useful bandwidth has more zeros in it. > > Are you paying > 10 $/gb? > Where is it that expensive? I pay 450.000 DHs (around 57.000 US$) in Morocco for an E3 (3

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-22 Thread Michelle Konzack
Hi Andrew, Am 2005-12-19 03:02:06, schrieb Andrew Suffield: > I wish we could get it that cheap for my day job. What we have to pay > to get useful bandwidth has more zeros in it. I feel with you, because I have an E3 in Morocco and must pay 450.000 DHs wich are around around 43.000 Euro per mon

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-22 Thread Michelle Konzack
Am 2005-12-18 12:36:05, schrieb Ron Johnson: > On Sun, 2005-12-18 at 12:59 +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:34:56PM +0100, Gürkan Sengün wrote: > > > I've run some scripts to find out the size of binary pakcages in debian > > > and how theycould be made smaller, her

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-21 Thread Andrew Suffield
On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 09:56:27AM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > On 12/19/05, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:27:36PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > * Steinar H. Gunderson: > > > > > > > My comments are about the same as on IRC: > > > > > > > > -

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-21 Thread Ron Johnson
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 16:12 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > "Steinar H. Gunderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:34:56PM +0100, Gürkan Sengün wrote: [snip] > The transition itself would go completly unadministered. Once dpkg is > switched to default to a diffe

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-21 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Olaf van der Spek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 12/21/05, Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> uncompressor > $ uncompressor > -bash: uncompressor: command not found > > This solution doesn't look usable in scripts and user have to use a > more complex syntax. You have to replac

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-21 Thread Olaf van der Spek
On 12/21/05, Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > uncompressor

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-21 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:34:56PM +0100, Gürkan Sengün wrote: >> Hi >> >> I've run some scripts to find out the size of binary pakcages in debian >> and how theycould be made smaller, here's the results: >> >> http://www.linuks.mine.nu/sizematters/

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-21 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Olaf van der Spek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 12/18/05, Steinar H. Gunderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 02:56:10PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: >> > Why would this be huge? >> > Why is it that hard to plugin another codec? >> >> You'd have to rewrite about every

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-21 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
"Steinar H. Gunderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:34:56PM +0100, Gürkan Sengün wrote: >> I've run some scripts to find out the size of binary pakcages in debian >> and how theycould be made smaller, here's the results: > > My comments are about the same as on IRC: >

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-19 Thread Olaf van der Spek
On 12/19/05, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:27:36PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Steinar H. Gunderson: > > > > > My comments are about the same as on IRC: > > > > > > - Disk space is cheap, bandwidth is cheap. > > > > Depends. Decent IP service cost

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Andrew Suffield
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:27:36PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Steinar H. Gunderson: > > > My comments are about the same as on IRC: > > > > - Disk space is cheap, bandwidth is cheap. > > Depends. Decent IP service costs a few EUR per gigabyte in most parts > of the world. I wish we coul

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Olaf van der Spek
On 12/18/05, Steinar H. Gunderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 10:15:31PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > > I guess what I'm asking is, why are tar and other applications using > > gzip instead of a generic library that handles all > > compression/decompression and can be

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Steinar H. Gunderson
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 10:15:31PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > I guess what I'm asking is, why are tar and other applications using > gzip instead of a generic library that handles all > compression/decompression and can be easily extended. General complexity, I'd guess. If you want “easily

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Russ Allbery
Steinar H Gunderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:23:56PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: >> Why would that stop working if you switch compression schemes? I guess >> tar is coded to use gzip with -z and bzip2 with -j, but why is there no >> generic way to add coders/de

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Olaf van der Spek
On 12/18/05, Steinar H. Gunderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:23:56PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > > Why would that stop working if you switch compression schemes? > > I guess tar is coded to use gzip with -z and bzip2 with -j, but why is > > there no generic way to

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Steinar H. Gunderson
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:23:56PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > Why would that stop working if you switch compression schemes? > I guess tar is coded to use gzip with -z and bzip2 with -j, but why is > there no generic way to add coders/decoders (codecs) to tar (and other > applications that w

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Steinar H. Gunderson
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 09:08:21PM +0100, Luca Brivio wrote: >> Not to mention that a DVD-R can fit about three million times as much >> data as a floppy disk, which was the dominant way of distributing >> software at the time. We can continue keep playing these number >> games, but I don't really

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Luca Brivio
On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 15:02:55 +0100 "Steinar H. Gunderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Not to mention that a DVD-R can fit about three million times as much > data as a floppy disk, which was the dominant way of distributing > software at the time. We can continue keep playing these number > games

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Mikhail Sobolev
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:23:56PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > On 12/18/05, Steinar H. Gunderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 02:56:10PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > > > Why would this be huge? > > > Why is it that hard to plugin another codec? > > > > You'd hav

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Florian Weimer
* Andreas Metzler: > Afaict from the webpage 7zip (LZMA) is quite a bit slower bzip2. - > Have you perhaps run some benchmarks? Memory use during decompression would be interesting, too. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROT

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Raphael Hertzog
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:34:56PM +0100, Gürkan Sengün wrote: > Hi > > I've run some scripts to find out the size of binary pakcages in debian > and how theycould be made smaller, here's the results: > > http://www.linuks.mine.nu/sizematters/ FWIW : https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Dpkg7Zip Actual mai

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Florian Weimer
* Steinar H. Gunderson: > My comments are about the same as on IRC: > > - Disk space is cheap, bandwidth is cheap. Depends. Decent IP service costs a few EUR per gigabyte in most parts of the world. > Thus, anything sacrificing lots of human power and CPU power to save on disk > or bandwidth

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Olaf van der Spek
On 12/18/05, Steinar H. Gunderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 02:56:10PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > > Why would this be huge? > > Why is it that hard to plugin another codec? > > You'd have to rewrite about every single tool in the world handling .debs, > make up a t

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Ron Johnson
On Sun, 2005-12-18 at 12:59 +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:34:56PM +0100, Gürkan Sengün wrote: > > I've run some scripts to find out the size of binary pakcages in debian > > and how theycould be made smaller, here's the results: > > My comments are about the same

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Ron Johnson
On Sun, 2005-12-18 at 15:02 +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:41:03AM -0500, Roberto Sanchez wrote: > >> - CPU doesn't grow nearly as fast as those three. > > In 1995 I had a Pentium 166 and a 56 kbps modem. Now, today the fastest > > CPU you can get from Intel is 3

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Mohammed Adnène Trojette
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005, Andreas Metzler wrote: > Have you perhaps run some benchmarks? Thanks to Kingsley Morse Jr.: http://adn.diwi.org/debian/p7zip/7za.jpg Even more precise at http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8051 -- adn Mohammed Adnène Trojette -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECT

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Steinar H. Gunderson
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 02:56:10PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > Why would this be huge? > Why is it that hard to plugin another codec? You'd have to rewrite about every single tool in the world handling .debs, make up a transition plan and upgrade from that. Not to mention that you'd have to

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Steinar H. Gunderson
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:41:03AM -0500, Roberto Sanchez wrote: >> - CPU doesn't grow nearly as fast as those three. > In 1995 I had a Pentium 166 and a 56 kbps modem. Now, today the fastest > CPU you can get from Intel is 3.6 GHz. However, the fastest dial modem > you can get today is still

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Olaf van der Spek
On 12/18/05, Steinar H. Gunderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:34:56PM +0100, Gürkan Sengün wrote: > > I've run some scripts to find out the size of binary pakcages in debian > > and how theycould be made smaller, here's the results: > > My comments are about the same as

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Olaf van der Spek
On 12/18/05, Roberto Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think that the biggest problem is really updates. Packages like > XFree86 (no X.org) and Openoffice.org are *huge*. A simple security > update to one of those packages causes all subordinate binary packages > to get a version bump. That

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Roberto Sanchez
Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:34:56PM +0100, Gürkan Sengün wrote: I've run some scripts to find out the size of binary pakcages in debian and how theycould be made smaller, here's the results: My comments are about the same as on IRC: - Disk space is cheap, bandwi

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
2005/12/18, Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Gürkan Sengün <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've run some scripts to find out the size of binary pakcages in debian > > and how theycould be made smaller, here's the results: > > > http://www.linuks.mine.nu/sizematters/ > > Afaict from the webpage

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Andreas Metzler
Gürkan Sengün <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've run some scripts to find out the size of binary pakcages in debian > and how theycould be made smaller, here's the results: > http://www.linuks.mine.nu/sizematters/ Afaict from the webpage 7zip (LZMA) is quite a bit slower bzip2. - Have you perhaps

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Steinar H. Gunderson
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:34:56PM +0100, Gürkan Sengün wrote: > I've run some scripts to find out the size of binary pakcages in debian > and how theycould be made smaller, here's the results: My comments are about the same as on IRC: - Disk space is cheap, bandwidth is cheap. - CPU doesn't

Size matters. Debian binary package stats

2005-12-18 Thread Gürkan Sengün
Hi I've run some scripts to find out the size of binary pakcages in debian and how theycould be made smaller, here's the results: http://www.linuks.mine.nu/sizematters/ Comments are welcome... Yours, Gürkan

Re: debian binary package

2003-12-01 Thread Artur R. Czechowski
Hello Frantisek, On Sat, Nov 29, 2003 at 03:55:20PM +0100, frantisek hrbata wrote: > /usr/local/lib/foo/ and manual pages in /usr/local/man/. when i invoke > dpkg -r or -P, dpkg wants to delete directories like /usr/local, > /usr/local/man and others. when a put files in right directories(binary >