[clc-devel] Ports tree is too fat!
Hi! <code> grim$ cd /usr/ports grim$ du -sh core opt . 3,8M core 16M opt 110M . </code> Just an idea, but i think that the most of that space is used by .fatprints of stuff like kde/gnome/openoffice/etc Maybe some kind of compression? I think that gzipped or bzipped .footprint is a great solution! They are rarely viewed by end-users and even developers, so why not to gzip them? Other files in footprint are rather small (like .md5sum) or frequently edited (Pkgfile and pre/post scripts) So I suggest a following: plain-text .md5sum Pkfile pre-install post-install and README files and gzipped .footprint.gz or uncompressed .footprint at the packager's choice This, however requires a minor changes in pkgutils... What the maintainers think about this? -- have a nice winter day, Oleksiy V. Khilkevich [GRIM-UANIC] [GRIM-RIPE] Please avoid sending me Word, Excel or PowerPoint attachments. Use plain text, HTML or PDF instead. http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
Hi, On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 15:58:28 +0200, Oleksiy V. Khilkevich wrote:
Hi!
<code> grim$ cd /usr/ports grim$ du -sh core opt . 3,8M core 16M opt 110M . </code> [...] What the maintainers think about this? I think your subject is kinda annoying, considering that we're talking about 20 MB here.
Johannes -- Johannes Winkelmann mailto:jw@tks6.net Bern, Switzerland http://jw.tks6.net
Oleksiy V. Khilkevich wrote:
Hi!
<code> grim$ cd /usr/ports grim$ du -sh core opt . 3,8M core 16M opt 110M . </code>
Just an idea, but i think that the most of that space is used by .fatprints of stuff like kde/gnome/openoffice/etc
Maybe some kind of compression? I think that gzipped or bzipped .footprint is a great solution! They are rarely viewed by end-users and even developers, so why not to gzip them?
Maybe you need to buy a new hard drive if a 20 megabyte port tree is too "fat" for you? NetBSD pkgsrc tree in comparison takes up about 250 megabytes uncompressed. Now that's what I'd call fat. $ du -sh * 3.8M core 16M opt $ gzip -9 */*/.footprint $ du -sh * 2.3M core 7.6M opt Saving 10 megabytes is not enough to warrant gzipping them, IMHO, but if you really want, you can use a compressed filesystem: http://north.one.pl/~kazik/pub/LZOlayer/ http://www.miio.net/fusecompress/ http://parallel.vub.ac.be/~johan/compFUSEd/ Regards, Jukka
--- Jukka Heino <jukka@karsikkopuu.net> wrote:
Maybe you need to buy a new hard drive if a 20 megabyte port tree is too "fat" for you? NetBSD pkgsrc tree in comparison takes up about 250 megabytes uncompressed. Now that's what I'd call fat.
While O's tone was rather crass, he does bring up an somewhat valid point when considering /checking out/ large httpup repositories. I'd be curious to see how much time could be saved nabbing, say, Han's repository with .footprint.gz's. I think any changes required in pkgutils would be rather minimal. Thoughts? Jay Dolan Software Engineer, Systems Analyst Windmill Cycles, Inc. 508.999.4000 __________________________________ Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year. http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/
While O's tone was rather crass, he does bring up an somewhat valid point when considering /checking out/ large httpup repositories. I'd be curious to see how much time could be saved nabbing, say, Han's repository with .footprint.gz's. I think any changes required in pkgutils would be rather minimal. Thoughts?
Valid point maybe, but to me honestly, you only have to "check out" the repo once, then every change is an update right? Yes that first dl of the repo could take forever but hell, that's the beauty of a multi-tasking operating system. but that's just me. -j -- Jonathan Asghar phone: 512.619.0722
--- Jonathan Asghar <jjasghar@gmail.com> wrote:
Valid point maybe, but to me honestly, you only have to "check out" the repo once, then every change is an update right? Yes that first dl of the repo could take forever but hell, that's the beauty of a multi-tasking operating system.
but that's just me.
-j
True. It was just an idea. Jay Dolan Software Engineer, Systems Analyst Windmill Cycles, Inc. 508.999.4000 __________________________________ Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year. http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/
Jay Dolan [2006-01-03 06:55]:
--- Jukka Heino <jukka@karsikkopuu.net> wrote:
Maybe you need to buy a new hard drive if a 20 megabyte port tree is too "fat" for you? NetBSD pkgsrc tree in comparison takes up about 250 megabytes uncompressed. Now that's what I'd call fat.
While O's tone was rather crass, he does bring up an somewhat valid point when considering /checking out/ large httpup repositories. I'd be curious to see how much time could be saved nabbing, say, Han's repository with .footprint.gz's. I think any changes required in pkgutils would be rather minimal. Thoughts?
I've thought about gzipping large .footprints before, for the reason you mentioned. I do view them all the time, but a decent editor can gunzip them transparently anyway. Regards, Tilman -- GnuPG key available at http://code-monkey.de/files/tsauerbeck-public-key.asc
Originally Jay Dolan wrote:
While O's tone was rather crass...
Sorry, really sorry! Improving my English in IRC channels have real disadvantages :). I did not want to bride but point your attention only. I use 56kbit dialup connection and even updating a port like openoffice becomes a real pain. And if I have ten ports comparable to openoffice... And openoffice from one repo + openoffice from another... Wow! :). -- Oleksiy V. Khilkevich [GRIM-UANIC] [GRIM-RIPE] Please avoid sending me Word, Excel or PowerPoint attachments. Use plain text, HTML or PDF instead. http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
participants (6)
-
Jay Dolan -
Johannes Winkelmann -
Jonathan Asghar -
Jukka Heino -
Oleksiy V. Khilkevich -
Tilman Sauerbeck