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
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
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
Am 2005-12-28 22:33:10, schrieb Benjamin Seidenberg:
> Seriously? Where? I live in the states, and we pay approx. $50/month
> (600 USD/year) for residential DSL (I think, parents pay the bill).
> That's a 1.5m down/512k up pipe, with horrible reliability (alltel
> sucks). Where can I get the fi
Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you need to pay 450.000 DHs (42.000 ¤) for an E3 of 34 MBit
> which give you maximum 20-24 MBit because the Infrastructure is
> to bad in Morocco then it IS expensive.
No. Based on what you've said, the price is the same regardless of
whether you d
Am 2005-12-27 16:04:42, schrieb Florian Weimer:
> * Michelle Konzack:
>
> > Because we do not get 34 MBit and we have not a netload
> > of 100% 24/7 the price per GByte is around 50 US$/GByte.
>
> This means you still have plenty capacity you've already paid for,
> supporting Steinar's claim that
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
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
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
|
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 $10/month. However, Michelle is European and
uses '.' w
Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
Michelle Konzack wrote:
Please not, that I had berween 12/1999 and 12/2004 a contract with a
Parisian ISP for a OC-3 and Hosting of one 19" Rack (210cm, 600kg).
I have payed including unlimited traffic 499.998 French Francs
(76.000 Euro) per month and my own Class-C
Michelle Konzack wrote:
Please not, that I had berween 12/1999 and 12/2004 a contract with a
Parisian ISP for a OC-3 and Hosting of one 19" Rack (210cm, 600kg).
I have payed including unlimited traffic 499.998 French Francs
(76.000 Euro) per month and my own Class-C Block registered at RIPE.
I
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 02:17 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > On Sun, 25 Dec 2005, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> >
>> >> > debs are created by debian/rules. So, only dependencies of dpkg would
>> >> >
* Michelle Konzack:
> Because we do not get 34 MBit and we have not a netload
> of 100% 24/7 the price per GByte is around 50 US$/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
* 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
>
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
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.
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 $/gb?
> >
> > Heck yes, you can't get it that cheap unless you have no SLA (or one
> > of those insulting SLAs that come with residential service, claiming
> > that
Am 2005-12-22 16:04:45, schrieb Florian Weimer:
> With traffic included? How's that more than 10$ 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
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
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
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
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
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
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]
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
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
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
#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,
#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
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
* 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
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
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
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
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:
> > > >
> > > > -
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
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
On 12/21/05, Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> uncompressor
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/
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
"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:
>
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
* 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
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
* 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
67 matches
Mail list logo
