On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 09:39:34PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > Le Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 11:31:23AM +0000, Thorsten Glaser a écrit : > > > > It’s actually apt/dpkg that takes that much memory because, > > you know, a database listing >30000 binary packages in sid *does* take > > quite some RAM. We have the same problem on m68k, but you can’t do much > > against that (except, possibly, use a more memory-efficient internal > > representation in those tools). > > Hi Thorsten, > > that seems to argue for reducing the list of packages in m68k or other ports. > Some programs are obviously useless on low-power platforms, for instance, most > of the packages with the Field::Biology tag. If you are interested I would be > willing to inspect the corner cases (such as mencal ?), in order to devise a > better filter for listing the packages related to biology and bioinformatics > to > skip on m68k, and other low-power architectures if their porters are > intersted.
I see your good intention in doing this to help embedded-ish architectures, but you have to keep in mind that doing this at the package level does not scale. This use case needs to be solved at the archive level, like emdebian does. -- Antonio Terceiro <terce...@debian.org>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
