From owner-freebsd-hubs Mon May 7 14:51:50 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hubs@freebsd.org Received: from casimir.physics.purdue.edu (casimir.physics.purdue.edu [128.210.146.111]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24CD937B422; Mon, 7 May 2001 14:51:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from will@physics.purdue.edu) Received: by casimir.physics.purdue.edu (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 062331BD20; Mon, 7 May 2001 16:46:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 16:46:50 -0500 From: Will Andrews To: David O'Brien Cc: Will Andrews , Jordan Hubbard , asami@FreeBSD.ORG, hubs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: We seriously need a cleanup on ftp-master Message-ID: <20010507164650.J3246@casimir.physics.purdue.edu> Reply-To: Will Andrews References: <20010507125604P.jkh@osd.bsdi.com> <20010507163119.H3246@casimir.physics.purdue.edu> <20010507144618.A12252@dragon.nuxi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.15i In-Reply-To: <20010507144618.A12252@dragon.nuxi.com>; from obrien@FreeBSD.ORG on Mon, May 07, 2001 at 02:46:18PM -0700 X-Operating-System: Linux 2.2.18 sparc64 Sender: owner-freebsd-hubs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 02:46:18PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 04:31:19PM -0500, Will Andrews wrote: > > Yes, I'd say remove all package sets prior to the last two releases, and > > keep ongoing package sets for -stable and -current. > > Should we think more carefully about this? We have users that install a > release and stick with it for a long time. But they still like to be > able to install packages with minimal effort. Do we want to break these > case? I guess this is one argument for having `pkg_add -r' use > package--stable rather than package-. Yes, but if you move the bits to FreeBSD-archive, they can just reset the prefix of their installs and/or use PACKAGESITE. Moving all the bits corresponding to a specific release will make it painless (should someone want to install an older release, sysinstall won't get confused by missing bits whether it be packages or distributions). > If we don't want to mirror one snapshot, then why are we in FTP mirroring > business? Does NetBSD send you all over the place to get bits? > We laugh at Linux because they do cause you have to have to all over the > place for bits. Is diskspace really *that* big of an issue? Should we > take up donations for disks? I thought BW was the real issue, and the > popularity of certain files, not their size is the issue there. > > BTW, releng{4,5}.freebsd.org exist because they are the snapshot builders. > There was no reason to not offer FTP access to them on the local machine > since they were built there. This is not the case with the Alpha snapshots. > AFAIK, they were never intended to replace ftp.freebsd.org. JKH has kept > a "stable" -current snapshot on ftp.freebsd.org for quite some time. OK. > Why?? People need these. > > Maybe we should discuss just what our purpose in offering an FTP site is > for. Is it just to get the latest release bits? Er.. I didn't say remove them, I said put them in FreeBSD-archive instead. I simply think it's inconvenient for mirror operators to host bits that are not obtained even one-tenth of 1% of the time as the newest releases/packages. Not everyone has 50GB of disk space to dedicate to FreeBSD, and I don't see a reason to expect that. :) -- wca To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hubs" in the body of the message