FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-10-2011, 10:09 PM
Mike Hommey
 
Default Upcoming FTPMaster meeting

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 09:58:57PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 21:43 +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 22:05, Joerg Jaspert <joerg@ganneff.de> wrote:
> > > * Throwaway DD built .debs (well, let's have the fight^Wdiscussion)
> >
> > could you please keep in mind the bandwidth impaired and try something
> > that avoids to upload those binary packages in the first place? but
> > also something that avoids the risk of uploads without even trying to
> > build the package first.
>
> Since there is no support for auto-building arch-independent binaries, I
> think this would only apply to the arch-dependent binaries. And you can
> already upload without those, which I always do for linux-2.6.

But you can only do so if there are arch:all packages iirc.

Mike


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20110210230935.GA22361@glandium.org">http://lists.debian.org/20110210230935.GA22361@glandium.org
 
Old 02-11-2011, 02:33 AM
Paul Wise
 
Default Upcoming FTPMaster meeting

On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 5:58 AM, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:

> Since there is no support for auto-building arch-independent binaries

I would hope that throwing away developer built debs would also apply
to arch-independent packages, IIRC that was part of the proposal.
There was talk of a Build-Architecture field for Architecture: all
stuff that can only be built on certain architectures (firmware,
bootloaders etc where there is no cross-compiler available).

--
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: AANLkTinWEO1+PSKrc7zA01+k=g-oXAKtYqNzQ5aBKUF-@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTinWEO1+PSKrc7zA01+k=g-oXAKtYqNzQ5aBKUF-@mail.gmail.com
 
Old 02-11-2011, 08:29 PM
Mark Hymers
 
Default Upcoming FTPMaster meeting

On Thu, 10, Feb, 2011 at 09:43:08PM +0100, Sandro Tosi spoke thus..
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 22:05, Joerg Jaspert <joerg@ganneff.de> wrote:
> > * Throwaway DD built .debs (well, let's have the fight^Wdiscussion)
>
> could you please keep in mind the bandwidth impaired and try something
> that avoids to upload those binary packages in the first place? but
> also something that avoids the risk of uploads without even trying to
> build the package first.

To be honest, I've always thought that if people are doing that, we have
bigger problems anyways. I don't really like the "throw away debs" idea
personally (it seems a complete waste of bandwidth, time and effort),
and would much rather go to source-only uploads. The opinions within
the ftpteam vary on this though, so it's something we're going to have
to figure out. Of course, this is orthogonal to having buildd support
for .all debs which needs discussing with the buildd team.

Mark


--
Mark Hymers <mhy at debian dot org>

"That's why the good die young; it's because Death can't be bothered to check
the paperwork."
Andy Hamilton, Old Harry's Game


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20110211212908.GA8255@hymers.org.uk">http://lists.debian.org/20110211212908.GA8255@hymers.org.uk
 
Old 02-11-2011, 08:30 PM
Mark Hymers
 
Default Upcoming FTPMaster meeting

On Thu, 10, Feb, 2011 at 09:27:14PM +0100, Josselin Mouette spoke thus..
> Le jeudi 03 février 2011 à 22:05 +0100, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
> > Attached below is a tentative agenda. This is an unsorted list and we
> > might not get to every point. We might also have missed any number of
> > points, if so feel free to tell us about them.
>
> Would it be possible to add support for ddebs?

I'll stick it on the agenda. I assume the details at
http://wiki.debian.org/AutomaticDebugPackages are the most up to date
notes you know of?

Thanks,

Mark

--
Mark Hymers <mhy at debian dot org>

"++?????++ Out of Cheese Error. Redo From Start."
Interesting Times, Terry Pratchett


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20110211213019.GB8255@hymers.org.uk">http://lists.debian.org/20110211213019.GB8255@hymers.org.uk
 
Old 02-11-2011, 09:00 PM
Don Armstrong
 
Default Upcoming FTPMaster meeting

On Thu, 03 Feb 2011, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> * Throwaway DD built .debs (well, let's have the fight^Wdiscussion)

This would allow

1) distribution-wide compilation options (for solving things like #552688)

2) distribution-wide debbuging debs

3) uniform, known build environments

the only major concern I keep hearing is bandwidth wasted in uploading
throwaway binary debs, but as we currently spend that bandwidth
anyway, that seems to be making the perfect the enemy of the good.
[And we can fight the fight of whether to throw away the debs or allow
binary-less uploads later.]


Don Armstrong

--
Your village called.
They want their idiot back.
-- xkcd http://xkcd.com/c23.html

http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20110211220045.GU17975@rzlab.ucr.edu">http://lists.debian.org/20110211220045.GU17975@rzlab.ucr.edu
 
Old 02-11-2011, 10:54 PM
Hideki Yamane
 
Default Upcoming FTPMaster meeting

On Fri, 4 Feb 2011 08:20:02 +0100
Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> wrote:
> I have not seen any word about XZ support.
>
> When you deployed support for new source package formats, you forbid
> lzma because xz was coming along and you mentioned that wheezy could have
> xz enabled.
>
> I would like to see xz allowed both for source package and for binary
> packages.

I want XZ support too, at least it reduce size for some font packages.
e.g.

$ ls -al otf-yozvox-yozfont*.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 henrich henrich 31053028 2011-02-12 08:33 otf-yozvox-yozfont-antique_13.03-dfsg-1+xz_all.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 henrich henrich 42877382 2011-02-12 08:46 otf-yozvox-yozfont-antique_13.03-dfsg-1_all.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 henrich henrich 20955718 2011-02-12 08:35 otf-yozvox-yozfont-cute_13.03-dfsg-1+xz_all.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 henrich henrich 29832102 2011-02-12 08:47 otf-yozvox-yozfont-cute_13.03-dfsg-1_all.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 henrich henrich 21121674 2011-02-12 08:37 otf-yozvox-yozfont-edu_13.03-dfsg-1+xz_all.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 henrich henrich 30301632 2011-02-12 08:47 otf-yozvox-yozfont-edu_13.03-dfsg-1_all.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 henrich henrich 21234852 2011-02-12 08:27 otf-yozvox-yozfont-new-kana_13.03-dfsg-1+xz_all.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 henrich henrich 30294686 2011-02-12 08:45 otf-yozvox-yozfont-new-kana_13.03-dfsg-1_all.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 henrich henrich 31286774 2011-02-12 08:30 otf-yozvox-yozfont-standard-kana_13.03-dfsg-1+xz_all.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 henrich henrich 42864814 2011-02-12 08:46 otf-yozvox-yozfont-standard-kana_13.03-dfsg-1_all.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 henrich henrich 4642 2011-02-12 08:25 otf-yozvox-yozfont_13.03-dfsg-1+xz_all.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 henrich henrich 4872 2011-02-12 08:45 otf-yozvox-yozfont_13.03-dfsg-1_all.deb

2/3 size, extremely efficient


--
Regards,

Hideki Yamane henrich @ debian.or.jp/org
http://wiki.debian.org/HidekiYamane


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20110212085417.18a526d4.henrich@debian.or.jp">http ://lists.debian.org/20110212085417.18a526d4.henrich@debian.or.jp
 
Old 02-12-2011, 12:15 PM
Philipp Kern
 
Default Upcoming FTPMaster meeting

On 2011-02-11, Hideki Yamane <henrich@debian.or.jp> wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Feb 2011 08:20:02 +0100
> Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> wrote:
>> I have not seen any word about XZ support.
>> When you deployed support for new source package formats, you forbid
>> lzma because xz was coming along and you mentioned that wheezy could have
>> xz enabled.
>> I would like to see xz allowed both for source package and for binary
>> packages.
> I want XZ support too, at least it reduce size for some font packages.
> e.g.

Do we have an idea how much more memory xz needs for decompression? I guess
it wouldn't be feasible to switch dpkg's default on package builds on those
architectures where we assume some more beefyness?

I'd imagine that our CD1s would also get more useful if we'd compress those
in any case. But then that probably also concerns our core packages where
memory usage might matter.

Kind regards
Philipp Kern


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: slrnild203.9tn.trash@kelgar.0x539.de">http://lists.debian.org/slrnild203.9tn.trash@kelgar.0x539.de
 
Old 02-12-2011, 12:15 PM
Philipp Kern
 
Default Upcoming FTPMaster meeting

On 2011-02-11, Hideki Yamane <henrich@debian.or.jp> wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Feb 2011 08:20:02 +0100
> Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> wrote:
>> I have not seen any word about XZ support.
>> When you deployed support for new source package formats, you forbid
>> lzma because xz was coming along and you mentioned that wheezy could have
>> xz enabled.
>> I would like to see xz allowed both for source package and for binary
>> packages.
> I want XZ support too, at least it reduce size for some font packages.
> e.g.

Do we have an idea how much more memory xz needs for decompression? I guess
it wouldn't be feasible to switch dpkg's default on package builds on those
architectures where we assume some more beefyness?

I'd imagine that our CD1s would also get more useful if we'd compress those
in any case. But then that probably also concerns our core packages where
memory usage might matter.

Kind regards
Philipp Kern


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: slrnild203.9tn.trash@kelgar.0x539.de">http://lists.debian.org/slrnild203.9tn.trash@kelgar.0x539.de
 
Old 02-12-2011, 12:57 PM
Adam Borowski
 
Default Upcoming FTPMaster meeting

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 01:15:47PM +0000, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2011-02-11, Hideki Yamane <henrich@debian.or.jp> wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 Feb 2011 08:20:02 +0100
> > Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> wrote:
> >> I have not seen any word about XZ support.

> > I want XZ support too, at least it reduce size for some font packages.
> > e.g.

The numbers you quoted (1/3 reduction) are actually on the small side --
although consistent with my estimates for the archive as a whole. You can
expect 50% gains on most packages, it's some bulky data ones that are
incompressible that jack down the average.

> Do we have an idea how much more memory xz needs for decompression? I guess
> it wouldn't be feasible to switch dpkg's default on package builds on those
> architectures where we assume some more beefyness?

On ARM, it's 90MB, I guess MIPS should be similar.
The man page says 65MB even in -9, but I guess they didn't count in the
code, libc, buffers and the likes.

Trying to run unmodified Debian on 64MB is a suicide, I'd say the weakest
type that are going to run stock Debian are chroots on n900, which, with
256MB, can handle all the phony stuff together with decompression just fine.
If you allow for everything but the decompression to be swapped out, even
128MB would work reasonably.

Anything lower and you go into emdebian, which repacks all the packages
anyway.

Thus, I think there are no problems with enabling XZ on all architectures.

> I'd imagine that our CD1s would also get more useful if we'd compress those
> in any case. But then that probably also concerns our core packages where
> memory usage might matter.

Memory during upgrades, not during actual operation.

--
1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor:
// Never attribute to stupidity what can be
// adequately explained by malice.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20110212135759.GA4791@angband.pl">http://lists.debian.org/20110212135759.GA4791@angband.pl
 
Old 02-12-2011, 01:06 PM
Andrey Rahmatullin
 
Default Upcoming FTPMaster meeting

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 02:57:59PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Trying to run unmodified Debian on 64MB is a suicide, I'd say the weakest
> type that are going to run stock Debian are chroots on n900, which, with
> 256MB, can handle all the phony stuff together with decompression just fine.
> If you allow for everything but the decompression to be swapped out, even
> 128MB would work reasonably.
I think that VPS'es with 128Mb RAM are still sold, not to mention existing
installations.

--
WBR, wRAR
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 12:37 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org