On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 03:46:18PM +0100, Robie Basak wrote: > Jammy: > main 253K > universe 75K > Bionic (as an example of a mature release with fewer SRUs in flight): > main 131K > universe 9.7K
"omg the size" was my first reaction when I read the proposal, but these sizes are far more reasonable than I expected. But, I also expect very few of our users would use -proposed. What percentage do you expect? I'm guessing less than 1%. Instead of configuring proposed by default, I suggest that we should make this work: $ sudo add-apt-repository proposed Unable to handle repository shortcut 'proposed' https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-properties/+bug/1829588 The wiki instructions for using proposed is pretty rough. If it were just one command I think it'd be a lot easier to encourage our users to provide feedback on pre-production packages. On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 06:23:05PM +1200, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote: > Maybe oracular is a good time to turn off some hashes and see what breaks. Yes, please. Some people have to justify every use of md5 and sha-1 in their environment. This is silly but it represents a real cost to some of our users and no value to us. I did a bit of quick experimenting with Noble: $ gzip -cd */binary-amd64/Packages.gz > /tmp/Packages $ grep -v MD5sum: < /tmp/Packages | grep -v SHA1: > /tmp/Packages-good-hashes $ gzip -k9 /tmp/Packages-good-hashes $ xz -k /tmp/Packages-good-hashes $ gzip -k9 /tmp/Packages $ xz -k /tmp/Packages $ ls -l /tmp/Packages* -rw-rw-r-- 1 sarnold sarnold 82509409 May 3 18:26 /tmp/Packages -rw-rw-r-- 1 sarnold sarnold 76129409 May 3 18:31 /tmp/Packages-good-hashes -rw-rw-r-- 1 sarnold sarnold 17909244 May 3 18:27 /tmp/Packages-good-hashes.gz -rw-rw-r-- 1 sarnold sarnold 13842660 May 3 18:27 /tmp/Packages-good-hashes.xz -rw-rw-r-- 1 sarnold sarnold 21542896 May 3 18:26 /tmp/Packages.gz -rw-rw-r-- 1 sarnold sarnold 16844820 May 3 18:26 /tmp/Packages.xz Maybe it's not fair to include -release since that is unlikely to change, but this is rough and easy. And since I can't help myself: $ zstd -k -9 /tmp/Packages -o /tmp/Packages.zstd-9 $ zstd -k -16 /tmp/Packages -o /tmp/Packages.zstd-16 $ zstd -k -9 /tmp/Packages-good-hashes -o /tmp/Packages-good-hashes.zstd-9 $ zstd -k -16 /tmp/Packages-good-hashes -o /tmp/Packages-good-hashes.zstd-16 $ ls -l /tmp/Packages*zstd* -rw-rw-r-- 1 sarnold sarnold 14408261 May 3 18:31 /tmp/Packages-good-hashes.zstd-16 -rw-rw-r-- 1 sarnold sarnold 16304863 May 3 18:31 /tmp/Packages-good-hashes.zstd-9 -rw-rw-r-- 1 sarnold sarnold 17456128 May 3 18:26 /tmp/Packages.zstd-16 -rw-rw-r-- 1 sarnold sarnold 19746359 May 3 18:26 /tmp/Packages.zstd-9 On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 08:43:11AM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > On Debian I have seen apt-update downloading diff files. Why don't we use > those for Ubuntu especially for the large files like Contents? My experience with the 'pdiff' files was drastically increased apt update time -- because the fixed costs of downloading files was a lot higher than the throughput on larger files. Plus, these diffs also take up additional space on the mirrors vs only storing the latest version. Maybe modern http/2 or http/3 means it wouldn't be as bad as it used to be, but I'm skeptical. Thanks
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel