How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

haxit · 2009-04-13 16:15:41

The title says it all. Estimated, how many gigs of pkgs is their on the i686 repo, and x86_64 repo.
I was thinking of making a "reserve" of packages on a dedicated package machine. All packages would be downloaded/updated on the machine, when the internet connection is idle. When needed for my main computer to upgrade, it would just grab it from that machine at a blazing fast speed.

Procyon · 2009-04-13 16:31:03

I ran awk on the autohtml page of a mirror. For i686 I came out on:
core: 170MB
extra: 5500MB
community: 6200MB

Xyne · 2009-04-13 16:52:35

Unless you intend to make the "dedicated package machine" publicly available as a mirror, you would just be pissing away server bandwidth.

Dusty · 2009-04-13 16:55:31

Lots of people run local mirrors. It'd be kind to mirror it from a host other than ftp.archlinux.org though.

Dusty

ak-89 · 2009-04-13 18:28:48

If only fast updating is enough you can put "pacman -Syuw --no-confirm" to your crontab. It syncs your pkg databases, checks for updates and then caches updates. Then when updating you just "pacman -Su" and you don't have to download updates anymore.

kensai · 2009-04-13 19:26:46

ak-89 wrote:

If only fast updating is enough you can put "pacman -Syuw --no-confirm" to your crontab. It syncs your pkg databases, checks for updates and then caches updates. Then when updating you just "pacman -Su" and you don't have to download updates anymore.

I think this is the sane approach.

fukawi2 · 2009-04-14 01:18:03

I've thought about doing this before, and come to the conclusion that it isn't worth the bandwidth and disk space, espeically if you're running both architectures. Plus, consider that you probably only use 10% of the packages from extra and community.

Having said that, I *do* mirror 'core', mainly because most of the packages are used, and downloading the a new kernel 6 times is painful each time a new update comes out

daf666 · 2009-04-14 06:44:53

Procyon wrote:

I ran awk on the autohtml page of a mirror. For i686 I came out on:
core: 170MB
extra: 5500MB
community: 6200MB

Woh.. ur saying u need like 3 DVD's to contain Arch? isnt that like 'larger than Debian'? nice..

moljac024 · 2009-04-14 09:22:38

daf666 wrote:

Procyon wrote:
I ran awk on the autohtml page of a mirror. For i686 I came out on:
core: 170MB
extra: 5500MB
community: 6200MB
Woh.. ur saying u need like 3 DVD's to contain Arch? isnt that like 'larger than Debian'? nice..

How is that larger than Debian ? Last I knew the number of DVDs needed for Debian was 10+ or something like that...

Last edited by moljac024 (2009-04-14 09:23:39)

foxbunny · 2009-04-14 09:29:05

Besides, burning the whole Arch repos on DVDs is an exercise in futility because Arch uses a rolling release model.

Nezmer · 2009-04-14 10:12:43

moljac024 wrote:

daf666 wrote:
Procyon wrote:
I ran awk on the autohtml page of a mirror. For i686 I came out on:
core: 170MB
extra: 5500MB
community: 6200MB
Woh.. ur saying u need like 3 DVD's to contain Arch? isnt that like 'larger than Debian'? nice..
How is that larger than Debian ? Last I knew the number of DVDs needed for Debian was 10+ or something like that...

I remember Etch was shipped with 3 DVDs . Lenny is shipped with 5 DVDs with the last one sized at 1.2 GB .

We should remember that *-debug packages are huge in size . I came from Debian Sid(unstable) to Arch and I honestly think that Arch has a wider selection of packages in its repositories . The odd package you wouldn't find in the repos can be easily found in the AUR or built from scratch .

Last edited by Nezmer (2009-04-14 10:13:54)

Vamp898 · 2009-04-15 00:35:07

I think Arch is alot smaller than Debian and thats better. Arch have AUR where is everything whats missing in the main repos so the main repos are much easyer to maintain

daf666 · 2009-04-15 08:24:03

Thats all cool... I wasn't comparing Arch and Debian, but I remembered that I was once like baffled by debian's size (12 CD's last time I checked lol!)
Knowing that Arch is KISS, seeing those repo sizes is impressive..

Crooksey · 2009-04-15 08:24:09

Agreed, the debain repo's are bloated and far to big.

I find 99% of the time I can get a package from a normal repo, If I cant its then in the AUR, if it isnt, Ill write a quick pkgbuild for it and add it to my local package server for later use.

Simple, fast and effective

Army · 2009-04-15 12:17:36

Crooksey, you forgot to mention, that of course you'll upload your PKGBUILD in the AUR, didn't you?

ataraxia · 2009-04-15 17:24:12

daf666 wrote:

Knowing that Arch is KISS, seeing those repo sizes is impressive..

The KISS is much of the reason for the size of the repos - building packages is as straightforward for the devs and TUs as installing and using them is for us. The result: lots of packages, up-to-date.

I think a lot of people miss the fact that the simplicity of PKGBUILDs is a huge factor in the success of Arch. The ease of contribution to AUR is also a great way to get the users more involved in the community. Almost without intending it, it makes many more people feel responsible for Arch, and that prevents a lot of the "somebody else's problem" and "I'm just a poor user" feelings that trash many other distros.

Crooksey · 2009-04-15 18:19:08

Army wrote:

Crooksey, you forgot to mention, that of course you'll upload your PKGBUILD in the AUR, didn't you?

When I get round to it yea, but the packages are usually just an obscure dependency of a really old machine I have, I have a load of stuff I need to upload, its just getting the time

haxit · 2009-04-15 19:07:33

Xyne wrote:

Unless you intend to make the "dedicated package machine" publicly available as a mirror, you would just be pissing away server bandwidth.

If I were to make one, it would be make public aswell. Anyways, I wouldn't be using arch's dedicated server. I would use a mirrors ;D

fukawi2 · 2009-04-15 22:42:41

Xyne wrote:

Unless you intend to make the "dedicated package machine" publicly available as a mirror, you would just be pissing away server bandwidth.

Not nessicarily... I have 6-7 Arch machines at home, so instead or downloading the same packages 6-7 times, I can download it once to a local server and then install from there, thereby saving server bandwidth. (assuming I only sync the packages that I have installed).

Also, my internet connection isn't suitable to make available as a public mirror - dynamic IP and only 256k upstream

haxit · 2009-04-16 02:35:21

fukawi2 wrote:

Xyne wrote:
Unless you intend to make the "dedicated package machine" publicly available as a mirror, you would just be pissing away server bandwidth.
Not nessicarily... I have 6-7 Arch machines at home, so instead or downloading the same packages 6-7 times, I can download it once to a local server and then install from there, thereby saving server bandwidth. (assuming I only sync the packages that I have installed).

That is also a good idea. However, if I we ever get Fibre Optics up here in Canada, I will host my own mirror for sure. Also, after I get a job.

R00KIE · 2009-04-16 19:49:03

I could make my own mirror but with only 2 PCs there is not much point, but I've thought of it , if I did it then it would be public but then again with only 768Kbit/s of upload it's not much better than what fukawi2 says.

fukawi2 wrote:

Also, my internet connection isn't suitable to make available as a public mirror - dynamic IP and only 256k upstream

My connection also uses dynamic ip but fortunately my isp provides a free of charge service so at least that wouldn't be a problem (and it works automagically, no client side intervention is needed ). Check if you have something like that on your "client page" at your isp.

fukawi2 · 2009-04-16 23:43:46

R00KIE wrote:

Check if you have something like that on your "client page" at your isp.

Nope... There'd be no point paying the extra AUD$10/month for their static IP option if they provided a free dyndns service

thisperishedmin · 2009-04-17 13:15:50

they gotta get you somehow

Arch Linux

#1 2009-04-13 16:15:41

How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#2 2009-04-13 16:31:03

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#3 2009-04-13 16:52:35

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#4 2009-04-13 16:55:31

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#5 2009-04-13 18:28:48

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#6 2009-04-13 19:26:46

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#7 2009-04-14 01:18:03

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#8 2009-04-14 06:44:53

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#9 2009-04-14 09:22:38

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#10 2009-04-14 09:29:05

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#11 2009-04-14 10:12:43

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#12 2009-04-15 00:35:07

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#13 2009-04-15 08:24:03

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#14 2009-04-15 08:24:09

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#15 2009-04-15 12:17:36

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#16 2009-04-15 17:24:12

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#17 2009-04-15 18:19:08

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#18 2009-04-15 19:07:33

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#19 2009-04-15 22:42:41

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#20 2009-04-16 02:35:21

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#21 2009-04-16 19:49:03

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#22 2009-04-16 23:43:46

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

#23 2009-04-17 13:15:50

Re: How much is the grand total of all the packages arch supports?

Board footer