CD-Working replaced

[Ralf Corsepius]

Am Don, 2003-02-27 um 18.15 schrieb Joel Sherrill:
> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > 
> > Am Don, 2003-02-27 um 17.03 schrieb Joel Sherrill:
> > > Jack Cawkwell wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hmm, I will have to find some more disk space and more download time!
> > > >
> > > > joel.sherrill at oarcorp.com writes:
> > > > > ... It is about 1,285,160 K ....
> > >
> > > If someone has suggestions about breaking it into multiple CDs, I
> > > am up for putting it in multiple directories.
> > The target libs could be shared among the different hosts ...
> 
> Correct me if I am wrong but the RPMs aren't packaged that way
> now.  Right?
Yep, it has not been of any importance until now and doesn't make much
sense for a single host, because it almost doubles the number of
rpms/tarballs (currently, one package containing cross-tools +
target-libs, then two packages of cross-tools + one package of
target-libs).

> It looks to be a lot of storage on the site.  My rough shot at
> du -s -k /opt/rtems/*/lib shows about 500Mb and the i386-rtems 
> doesn't appear to be installed.  That's not compressed though
> so actually mileage may vary. 
>
> Say 4x compression and it is still ~125 Mb and that's optimistic.
> If that's the case, then sharing the target libraries might make sense.


> But it would have to be in RPM and tar form since RPM is the
> primary format and other hosts get tarballs.  So we get it down
> to RPM and 1 tar image.  That says one set on the CDs but allows
> other hosts.

Yes, you could share the target-libs for cygwin and solaris-hosted
toolchains, gaining the disk space currently required by one of these
tool-chains.

However, you then could additionally ship those target-libs for all
targets, whose cross-toolchains don't build :-)

> > >  The bad thing is that
> > > when a single tool gets new binaries, it touches all three hosts so
> > > it will be hard to minimize what has to be downloaded.
> > >
> > > Any ideas on a smart client that would only get updates?
> > For the linux packages, I'd recommend apt-rpm and apt4rpm.
Did you have a look into these tools (apt-rpm implements the client side
of apt-for-rpm, apt4rpm implements the server side)?

I am using them myself and _highly_ recommend using them, but I'm
biased.

Ralf