Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 71

Thread: Debian Wheezy To Take Up 73 CDs Or 11 DVDs

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    Okay, now you're just trolling. Equating bloat = better simply is not true. Bloat does not equal more pretty, more speed or more features. If the distro optimized for 64mb does exactly the same using less memory, how is that distro worse?

    That's right, it isn't.
    Except it isn't the same. The whole point of using the better compression algorithm, is... well... the better compression algorithm. Less downloading, hopefully faster installs, etc. Suddenly i lose out on those benefits just because 1 person in a million has to have it run on a 32MB machine from 1998? That's stupid.

    It's the same idea behind the distros mostly require 586 support for thier x86 distros. Some even require 686, while others are at 386. If you argue that they have to stick with something compatible with the 8086 just because you happen to have a machine that old, well, I'm going to tell you to go with LFS or another distro that better fits your needs.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    680

    Default

    use x86_64 already

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    Except it isn't the same. The whole point of using the better compression algorithm, is... well... the better compression algorithm. Less downloading, hopefully faster installs, etc. Suddenly i lose out on those benefits just because 1 person in a million has to have it run on a 32MB machine from 1998? That's stupid.

    It's the same idea behind the distros mostly require 586 support for thier x86 distros. Some even require 686, while others are at 386. If you argue that they have to stick with something compatible with the 8086 just because you happen to have a machine that old, well, I'm going to tell you to go with LFS or another distro that better fits your needs.
    Please count the difference between xz -6 and xz -9 compression. I bet it's on the order of 0-1%.

    I tested some files, and saw no difference - though all of them were smaller than 64mb.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,778

    Default

    There's also the lrzip (Long Range ZIP) tool (interestingly, by Con Kolivas) which has some truly amazing compression ratios. I think it's even being included in libarchive. It's very slow at compressing, but decompressing in quite OK.
    Last edited by RealNC; 07-13-2012 at 06:58 AM.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    Please count the difference between xz -6 and xz -9 compression. I bet it's on the order of 0-1%.

    I tested some files, and saw no difference - though all of them were smaller than 64mb.
    As xz -6 and -9 uses the same cpu settings, the only difference is the DictSize, so on files 8 MiB or smaller, there is no difference whatsoever. On larger files the difference is generally still quite small...

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    267

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    Distro optimized for machines with < 64MB memory over normal machines that 99.9% of the user base will have -> user abandons and consequently installs a better distro.

    See how that works? Everyone gets to pick what works best for them.
    Here's how it works in real life:
    Distro1 supports 64MB machines
    Distro2 needs 512MB or more for all the "cool features" > runs sluggish > gets derided for sluggishness
    Distro2 users think about switching to distro1; find some features missing >complain about distro1 supporting obsolete hardware

    If you don't see that, reread this thread! :P
    Debian has chosen to support 64 MB machines. Live with it. There are other distros for you to use if you can't.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibidem View Post
    Here's how it works in real life:
    Distro1 supports 64MB machines
    Distro2 needs 512MB or more for all the "cool features" > runs sluggish > gets derided for sluggishness
    Distro2 users think about switching to distro1; find some features missing >complain about distro1 supporting obsolete hardware

    If you don't see that, reread this thread! :P
    Debian has chosen to support 64 MB machines. Live with it. There are other distros for you to use if you can't.
    I honestly don't care. I think it's silly to consider that an important criteria for their distro, but if that's what they want to support then it's fine with me.

    It's you guys who are getting up in arms about this.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    40N 105W
    Posts
    45

    Default Torrents, Parallel Update Operations and Gentro

    One might download download all this to help the distribution via bit torrent.. I know Debian has torrent update support for at least one of the repos. Not sure how that works or if any of this would be available past the ISO torrent.

    @Ajenbo

    I understood you the first time Great question. Thanks for the post.

    At least the decompression could be done as soon as it's downloaded. I think this reflects a general lack of enthusiasm from the developers. I'd like to see a contribution share ratio set up to help improve non-developer contributions where hopefully we could pay developers a market compensation which would give them more time to do stuff like that.

    One reason to not install stuff during download is that you could end up with a dead system if something happened. Probably 5% of the systems out there are capable of crashing under load, at least during the summer months, and maybe more for laptops with their $60 dollar cooling fan assembles that are harder to service then the fan belt on a car. I still say it could be done, with a little thought, but I think right now we have devs who are overworked and underpaid, “Captain! She can't take much of this!”, and we might have leadership issues same as we do everywhere else -the cream is definitely not rising to the top in our alcohol loving cultures of denial.

    The Xbox console game manufacturers PC OS also does it that way too, in serial, all of it. They should have waited until IBM developed it further before running off with it.

    @GreatEmerald

    I'll have to try Gentoo and see if that actually does anything different. I'm skeptical

    Thanks all.

    Be real, be sober.
    Last edited by WSmart; 07-15-2012 at 10:23 PM. Reason: That would be Gentoo LInux, spelling. Thanks.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    680

    Default

    Yeah it seams more a implementation/time issue then a technical issue. As the current implementation works well going the extra mile for a bit of speed but more complexity might be a strain for the developers working on it.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,991

    Default

    Enabling completely unrelated operations to proceed in parallel should be much easier than conflicting operations (the mentioned install gnome and uninstall gtk at the same time). One should be able to install ncurses and supertux in parallel if they have nothing in common, or if they would both install the same dep.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •