On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 04:09:10PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 03:15:48PM -0400, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:27:57AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > > "support" does not imply "include on the CD image". The point would be to > > > make sure that it is available and usable by the people who rely on it.
> > The problem here is that our python handling has been entirely designed > > around the idea that each python extension should be packaged as a single > > python-foo binary package containing support for all supported python > > versions. So "support" does imply that the binaries for any extensions we > > wish to include in that support, and which are also needed on the CD, > > *will* be included on the CD image, at a fairly significant disk space cost. > Ah, I understand. So we wouldn't need to ship all of the interpreters on > the CD, but we would end up with some extra payload anyway from the > extension modules. Yes. A quick analysis of the list of arch-dependent python extensions present on the maverick i386 alternate CD totals to around 10MB; so each python version added to the supported set would take up a little less than that on the alternate CD and an indeterminate amount in the same ballpark on live CDs. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [email protected] [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
