Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 00:39:12 +0100 From: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> To: Tijl Coosemans <tijl@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Reducing the size of the ports tree (brainstorm v2) Message-ID: <545963A0.90506@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <20141103212438.0893c3dc@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> References: <20141031185621.GC15967@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <54573B31.7080809@gmx.de> <20141103212438.0893c3dc@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Am 03.11.2014 um 21:24 schrieb Tijl Coosemans: > Other tools won't change anything. It's the file system that would > have to change which is not going to happen. When the ports tree was > created disks were much smaller and file systems were better (still not > good) at storing small files. Today disks are much bigger and file > systems have adapted to that. Now it's time for the ports tree to adapt. So you're saying the only answer we've had to growing storage capacities was growing block sizes, without adding support for "many small files" back in. That's still the fault of the tool (here: tool == file system) and not of the ports tree.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?545963A0.90506>