Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2000 17:51:52 -0600 From: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net> To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Message-ID: <00021318141200.06543@nomad.dataplex.net> In-Reply-To: <20000213135122.B37646@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <20000209215806.M99353@abc.123.org> <00021222301300.02765@nomad.dataplex.net> <20000213135122.B37646@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 13 Feb 2000, David O'Brien wrote: > On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 10:20:58PM -0600, Richard Wackerbarth wrote: > > And you have still not addressed the size problem. > > Use CVSup -- you will use the minimal amount of disk space. First, I do use CVSup. However, it doesn't have anything to do with the size of things. CVSup is a delivery mechanism. It delivers objects (files), or more precisely collections of objects. It has NO control over either the number of objects or their size. What CVSup, or Rsync, can do is increase the transfer efficiency of a SERIES of views of the same object. CVSup does to TRANSMISSION what RCS does to STORAGE of the SERIES of a particular object. None of these mechanisms are more efficient that a compressed ftp for the initial transfer of the object. My complaint is with the objects themselves and their aggregation into collections for transmission. Although it may be possible to bypass the aggregation and selectively reference individual objects, doing so is not easy. Improvements in the organization can make it easier to be selective. This is NOT a PROGRAMMING problem. For lack of a better description, it is a problem in LIBRARY SCIENCE. It won't be solved by the "authors", but rather the "librarians" -- Richard Wackerbarth rkw@Dataplex.NET To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00021318141200.06543>