Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:46:29 -0300 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" <daniel.sobral@tcoip.com.br> To: jason andrade <jason@dstc.edu.au> Cc: "Jose M. Alcaide" <jose@we.lc.ehu.es>, hubs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 4.4 upcoming release/timetabling/mirroring Message-ID: <3B9E23C5.9080500@tcoip.com.br> References: <Pine.OSF.4.20.0109112016290.29054-100000@azure.dstc.edu.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
jason andrade wrote: > > i would say a Tier-2 Official FreeBSD mirror could be defined as: > > o carrying FreeBSD release trees (3 releases including the latest?) > o carrying FreeBSD releases ISOs (3 ?) > o carrying FreeBSD packages > o carrying FreeBSD security (aka CERT) > o carrying FreeBSD docs > o must be up to date with all of the above to within 48 hours ? > > and that would meet the minimum requirements of what 75% of the general > population want - a site to download or install FreeBSD from. It just so happens that the packages distributions is what takes most space. Distfiles may be 12 Gb, but it's only one thing. Packages go at 4, 4.5 Gb and there is a copy for each release, one for each architecture. Alas, there is a good chance that 5.0 will have more than two architectures. > this would not stop Tier-2s from carrying additional content such as > > o FreeBSD distfiles > o FreeBSD branches source tree > o FreeBSD CVSup source tree > o FreeBSD CTM source tree > o FreeBSD misc/development content > o FreeBSD archive releases > o FreeBSD SNAP releases Now, here is the funny thing. Everyone I know uses ports exclusively. Everyone I know uses cvsup to keep up to date. Branches and the cvsup source tree combined number at little more than 4 Gb. Everything else takes little space. So, from where I sit, it is much more important to keep distfiles and cvsup source tree than keeping, say, 4.2-release packages. > Of course there are a number of official FreeBSD mirrors now that can > only carry a partial release tree (only the latest releases or a specific > architecture, usually i386), so we'd have to think about how that could > fit into things as a Tier-2. > > comments ? Honestly, I think people's priority vary too much for what you propose. What I _would_ propose is that Tier-2 mirrors keep everything (CTM, archive, snap and misc excepted), but just the latest release and stable for both platforms. I think this would impose a lesser minimum disk penalty, scale better, and see to most needs. Of course, whatever else a Tier-2 may carry is up to each one. -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) Daniel.Sobral@tcoip.com.br dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org capo@notorious.bsdconspiracy.net The first rule of intelligent tinkering is to save all the parts. -- Ehrlich To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hubs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B9E23C5.9080500>