Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 71

Thread: Debian Wheezy To Take Up 73 CDs Or 11 DVDs

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    Actually, it's 35.915 floppies. 3.000 floppy disks only contain 4GB.

    Yes, this comment serves no real purpose whatsoever... :-P
    I thought that number looked wrong But does Debian support splitting deb's or would you have to split them and then splice them to you hard drive before installing?

    P.s. what ever happened to 2.88MB floppies?

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    945

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    Actually, it's 35.915 floppies.
    I'm almost sure that when the install got to 99,9% the last sector of the last floppy would be unreadable and the whole installation would abort...

    @curaga I almost forgot about that! I think I managed to format some floppies with 1,72MB back in the 90's but I think there were some consequences to that. Can't remember what it was. I'm glad floppies died a long time ago

    @AJenbo I never saw a drive that was compatible with them, although all my PCs had that option in the BIOS. Come to think of it I never even saw a 2,88MB floppy for sale.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    707

    Default

    I still know a company that uses floppies as a backup medium for there accounting....

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    379

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJenbo View Post
    I still know a company that uses floppies as a backup medium for there accounting....
    Just yesterday we 'cleaned' up the backup safe, tons of 5 1/4 and 3 1/2 inch floppys
    We kept them... who knows, we still got some USB floppy drives (but only 3.5 inch ones)!

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    Swap storm -> install times measured in the hours -> user abandons install and consequently Debian.
    User who is installing on a machine with 64 megs and expects it to perform like it's 1999 -> is a moron -> Debian probably doesn't need him anyway

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    77

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibidem View Post
    Debian packages are an ar archive (same as static libraries), containing 2 compressed tarballs: the first has metadata, the second has the package content. I think they want to move from tar.gz to tar.xz for these two tarballs.
    Actually, the first tarball is always gz-compressed for compatibility, the second may be compressed using gz, bzip2, lzma (deprecated) or xz.

    The current default is still gz, as the package must explicitly pre-depend on an appropriate dpkg version to use anything else (>=1.10.24 for bzip2, >=1.13.25 for lzma and >=1.15.6 for xz). As the oldest still supported dpkg version (1.15.8.12 in squeeze) fully supports xz, the discussion is about dropping that requirement and making xz the default.


    Also please note that the default for gz and bzip2 is to compress using -9, but the default for lzma and xz is to compress using -6, so unpacking an xz-compressed deb will only require 9 MiB RAM, not the 64 MiB RAM mentioned several times in this thread. That means that Debian would require approximately 32 MiB RAM to install, which I don't think is too onerous, especially considering that the official hardware requirement already is 64 MiB.
    Last edited by Jonno; 07-11-2012 at 01:26 PM. Reason: Spelling

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,212

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    Swap storm -> install times measured in the hours -> user abandons install and consequently Debian.
    Distro optimized for machines with < 64MB memory over normal machines that 99.9% of the user base will have -> user abandons and consequently installs a better distro.

    See how that works? Everyone gets to pick what works best for them.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    772

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    Is that with the 1.44mb standard
    There actually is no 1.44MB standard. The format that term refers to is 512 bytes/sector * 2880 sectors, which only comes out to 1.44 MB if you think that 1KB = 1024B while 1MB = 1000KB.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    Distro optimized for machines with < 64MB memory over normal machines that 99.9% of the user base will have -> user abandons and consequently installs a better distro.

    See how that works? Everyone gets to pick what works best for them.
    Okay, now you're just trolling. Equating bloat = better simply is not true. Bloat does not equal more pretty, more speed or more features. If the distro optimized for 64mb does exactly the same using less memory, how is that distro worse?

    That's right, it isn't.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,801

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJenbo View Post
    P.s. what ever happened to 2.88MB floppies?
    The real reason the format didn't make it is anyone's guess. Most probably it was due to the high price of media (four times the price of a 1.44 disk) and incompatibility with some controllers (meaning that you could buy such a drive, but it wouldn't work when you put it in your PC if you had an older controller.) And this meant that software wasn't offered on such disks, since the vendors wanted to be as compatible as possible. It's a vicious cycle: software comes in 1.44MB disks, so you don't need to buy a 2.88MB drive. People don't buy 2.88MB drives so software doesn't ship in 2.88MB disks...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •