Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 14 May 2006 11:39:53 -0500
From:      pauls@utdallas.edu
To:        ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Has the port collection become to large to handle.
Message-ID:  <183377CF4293A752066EF095@paul-schmehls-powerbook59.local>
In-Reply-To: <p06230939c08c16a1821f@[128.113.24.47]>
References:  <MIEPLLIBMLEEABPDBIEGIEPBHGAA.fbsd@a1poweruser.com> <p06230939c08c16a1821f@[128.113.24.47]>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--==========2F55E388CCB417CD7204==========
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

--On May 13, 2006 7:18:16 PM -0400 Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> =
wrote:

> At 2:28 PM -0400 5/13/06, fbsd wrote:
>> To all question list readers;
>>
>> Now with 14576 ports in the collection where do you
>> draw the line that its too large to be downloading
>> the whole collection when you just use 10 or 20 of
>> them?
>
> This is a good question.  For all those people who want
> to roll their eyes and ignore this question, please
> answer it.  Where *DO* you draw the line?  Obviously it's
> not at 10,000 ports.  Will it be 20,000?  50,000?  How
> many programs exist?  Will every single program known to
> man eventually be in the ports collection?  How hopeless
> is that?  And if not, then "Where do you draw the line?".
>
I must confess to some confusion here.  I don't have any boxes (and most of =

mine are headless servers) that have only 10 or 20 ports installed.  (Cvsup =

alone has two dependencies, so you'll have three ports installed just to=20
keep ports up to date.)  Most of my servers have over 100 installed ports=20
at least.  My workstation is close to 490.  Furthermore, the *entire* ports =

tree, **up-to-date**, consumes 329MB of space (without distfiles).  In the=20
days when you can buy 20GB hard drives for $10 US, how can this be a=20
problem?

The purpose of the ports collection is to make available to FreeBSD users=20
programs that they might find useful.  The more programs there are=20
available, the wider the audience that is attracted to FreeBSD.=20
Furthermore, a port wouldn't even exist in FreeBSD unless at least *one*=20
person was interested enough in it to become the creator and maintainer of=20
that port.

The price *you* pay for keeping your ports up to date is very minor - 10=20
minutes a day (max) updating through CVS and 329MB of hard drive space.=20
And if you have to pay for bandwidth use, you only need to cvsup right=20
before you have to install or upgrade a port.

Yet this suggestions is - lets make the system infinitely more complex so=20
that a handful of people who dislike having to use that 329MB and do CVSup=20
occasionally don't have to deal with it.  Does that make sense to you?=20
Personally, I would rather burden that handful of people by making them do=20
customization than to punish the entire community to satisfy their request.

I *do* think tracking downloads would be valuable, *if* there's a way to=20
implement it and aggregate the data.  Knowing how many times a particular=20
port is installed might open more than a few eyes.  The problem is, you'd=20
have to have accurate stats from *every* mirror and those would have to be=20
aggregated and collated.  Not a big problem, for sure, but still, more work =

for somebody who's already a volunteer.  But knowing how many times a=20
port's distfile was fetched and how many times it was upgraded would be=20
useful information.

The problem is, it would require some sort of "ping" to FreeBSD that=20
included useful data, because, once the base port is installed (which is=20
somewhere between 8 and 40K normally), the install is going to pull the=20
distfile from the MASTER_SITE, which could be one of twenty or thirty=20
different sites.  This "ping" could also include information such as which=20
mirror sites are out of date or off-line.  I get the sense that tracking=20
this would not be too hard, because the "intelligence" already exists=20
within ports, but I'm not knowledgeable enough to tackle the problem.

Paul Schmehl (pauls@utdallas.edu)
Adjunct Information Security Officer
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/

--==========2F55E388CCB417CD7204==========--




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?183377CF4293A752066EF095>