> " " == Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "zhaoway" == zhaoway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
zhaoway> This is only a small part of the whole story, IMHO. See
zhaoway> my other email replying you. ;)
>>> Maybe there could be another version of Packages.gz without
>>>
> "Brian" == Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Brian> Note: [1] Normally I try to find the files manually via
Brian> lynx, but right at the moment this is rather difficult, as
Brian> I seem to try numerous directories but not get the expected
Brian> result. Some packages
> "zhaoway" == zhaoway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
zhaoway> This is only a small part of the whole story, IMHO. See
zhaoway> my other email replying you. ;)
>> Maybe there could be another version of Packages.gz without the
>> extended descriptions -- I imagine they would tak
> " " == Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "sluncho" == sluncho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
sluncho> How hard would it be to make daily diffs of the Package
sluncho> file? Most people running unstable update every other day
sluncho> and this will require downloading and
> "sluncho" == sluncho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
sluncho> How hard would it be to make daily diffs of the Package
sluncho> file? Most people running unstable update every other day
sluncho> and this will require downloading and applying only a
sluncho> couple of diff files.
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 11:40:01PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 06:04:58PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> > Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > What is the real problem with the large package files? They take a long
> > > time to download, but so do emacs and oth
From: Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: big Packages.gz file
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:59:13 +1100
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 03:04:10AM +0800, zhaoway wrote:
> > A big package index IMHO is the current bottleneck of Debian package system.
>
> What is the real p
From: Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: big Packages.gz file
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 23:40:01 +1100
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 06:04:58PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> > The packages file gets downloaded _every single time_ you do an update,
> > and for those of us w
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 06:04:58PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > What is the real problem with the large package files? They take a long
> > time to download, but so do emacs and other bloatware.
>
> Yeah, but how often do you download emacs?
Never, I
Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What is the real problem with the large package files? They take a long
> time to download, but so do emacs and other bloatware.
Yeah, but how often do you download emacs?
The packages file gets downloaded _every single time_ you do an update,
and for
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 03:04:10AM +0800, zhaoway wrote:
> A big package index IMHO is the current bottleneck of Debian package system.
What is the real problem with the large package files? They take a long
time to download, but so do emacs and other bloatware.
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <
On Mon, Jan 8, 2001 at 18:20:16 +0100 (+), Andreas Fuchs wrote:
> On 2001-01-07, Goswin Brederlow
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > zhaoway> 1) It prevent many more packages to come into Debian, for
> > zhaoway> example, Linux Gazette are now not present newest issues
> > zhaoway> i
Hello,
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 03:04:10AM +0800, zhaoway wrote:
> * To seperate Packages.gz to be along with each package as another seperate
> file. Ceazar's belong to Ceazar. ;)
> i.e., each pkg_ver-sub_arch.deb with a pkg_ver-sub_arch.idx
No, thats not a win. You would end up checking time
On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 05:18:02PM -0500, Chris Gray wrote:
> > Brian May writes:
> bm> What do large packages have to do with the size of the index file,
> bm> Packages?
>
> I think the point was that every package adds about 30-45 lines to the
> Packages file. You don't need to down
On 2001-01-07, Goswin Brederlow
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> zhaoway> 1) It prevent many more packages to come into Debian, for
> zhaoway> example, Linux Gazette are now not present newest issues
> zhaoway> in Debian. People occasionally got fucked up by packages
> Any reasons why the
> " " == Chris Gray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Brian May writes:
> "zhaoway" == zhaoway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
zhaoway> 1) It prevent many more packages to come into Debian, for
zhaoway> example, Linux Gazette are now not present newest issues
zhaoway> in Debian. P
> Brian May writes:
> "zhaoway" == zhaoway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
zhaoway> 1) It prevent many more packages to come into Debian, for
zhaoway> example, Linux Gazette are now not present newest issues
zhaoway> in Debian. People occasionally got fucked up by packages
zha
> On 2001-01-05, Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What do large packages have to do with the size of the index file,
> > Packages?
Andreas Fuchs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> They waste one byte per multiple of 10 bytes of package size. (-;
You mean one byte per order of magnitude of packa
On 2001-01-05, Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What do large packages have to do with the size of the index file,
> Packages?
They waste one byte per multiple of 10 bytes of package size. (-;
Bad joke? So sue me.
--
Andreas Fuchs, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, antifuchs
Hail R
> "zhaoway" == zhaoway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
zhaoway> 1) It prevent many more packages to come into Debian, for
zhaoway> example, Linux Gazette are now not present newest issues
zhaoway> in Debian. People occasionally got fucked up by packages
zhaoway> like anachism-doc
20 matches
Mail list logo
