Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Debian Wheezy To Take Up 73 CDs Or 11 DVDs

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • phoronix
    started a topic Debian Wheezy To Take Up 73 CDs Or 11 DVDs

    Debian Wheezy To Take Up 73 CDs Or 11 DVDs

    Phoronix: Debian Wheezy To Take Up 73 CDs or 11 DVDs

    Aside from bringing up the successor to Debian 7.0 Wheezy and Debian's plans for UEFI SecureBoot support, Debian developers in Managua also discussed on Monday the size of this next Debian release and other release plans...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTEzNzA

  • curaga
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • AJenbo
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • WSmart
    replied
    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, 10:23 PM. Reason: That would be Gentoo LInux, spelling. Thanks.

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ibidem
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jonno
    replied
    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...

    Leave a comment:


  • RealNC
    replied
    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, 06:58 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • curaga
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • AJenbo
    replied
    use x86_64 already

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X