[Exherbo-dev] Replacing categories take 27 zillion
eg at gaute.vetsj.com
Sun May 24 10:53:30 BST 2009
Another idea: Does it need to be a strict on-disk layout? Why not let
each repository handle things like they want apart from having to keep
the packages in packages/, I can imagine the aa, ab, ba, .. layout
gets difficult to browse manually; you won't have any idea how many
packages are where, and you wouldn't get an overview unless you did ls
-R.. in which case there isn't much point in having subdirs anyway.
With no strict layout, small repositories would probably just put
everything in the root, in x11 you could keep something similiar to
what it is now; prototypes, servers.. to keep maintaining - and manual
browsing - simpler.
An option is to make repositories choose one of a few available
options and stick to that, either keep everything in the root, or use
something like i suggested for x11.. and so on..
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Gaute Hope <eg at gaute.vetsj.com> wrote:
> On 2/15/09, Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 16:43:42 +0100
>> Bryan Østergaard <bryan.ostergaard at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> So the biggest repositories we have atm is arbor with almost 400
>>> packages and x11 with 316 packages. And most repositories are about
>>> 100 packages or even less.
>> What're absolute numbers for first two letters, last two letters or
>> first and last letter? How many subdirectories do we end up with, and
>> how many things are in each subdirectory?
> A dirty script (no laughing..) i wrote gave me these numbers for my
> currently installed repositories on how many folders you would get for
> each repository using the different methods (f & l = first and last):
> script: http://dpaste.com/47019/ (no guarantees.. and it overwrites
> /tmp/packages in case you got one..)
> output attached.
> - gaute
More information about the Exherbo-dev