On 11/08/11 at 19:52 +0000, Philipp Kern wrote: > On 2011-08-11, Adam Borowski <kilob...@angband.pl> wrote: > >> Think of both user systems and the Debian buildds which will waste more > >> time - an especially bad problem on slower architectures. > > The gain is especially meaningful for slower architectures, as they tend to > > have less disk space and slower network links (arm tends to be used in > > phones). No extra memory is needed -- decompression is not done in parallel > > with memory-hungry stages of dpkg's work. The decompression, merely 2.5 > > times slower than with gzip, is a tiny fraction of what dpkg takes. > > It takes a lot longer to compress on slower architectures (i.e. on the > buildds), though. You could've built a whole package in that time. > (Resorting > to your style of argument.)
Wouldn't it be better to get more buildds for those archs, then? That would be a totally appropriate use of Debian money... Of course, it might require finding more buildd maintainers. But I must admit that I have no idea what buildd admins spend time on, and how it's possible to help them. For example, if we tried to have more identical buildds, instead of just one of each model, would it reduce the workload of buildd admins significantly? Lucas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110814191902.ga3...@xanadu.blop.info
