Comparing disk usage before and after Fedora upgrade to a fresh install
Following up my previous posts, this one is about Fedora.
Fedora 9 came out last week, and it’s time to test.
Test scenario
Install Fedora 8
Install Fedora 8 with Fedora-8-i386-DVD.iso , default installation.
Update system with ‘yum update’
Reboot
Run ‘yum update’ again
Run ‘yum clean all’
Run ‘df -h’ and write down result.
Run ‘rpm -qa | wc -l’ and write down result.
Upgrade to Fedora 9
Reboot, and boot with Fedora-9-i386-DVD.iso, and do a default upgrade to Fedora 9.
Update system with ‘yum update’
Reboot
Run ‘yum update’ again
Run ‘yum clean all’
Run ‘df -h’ and write down result.
Run ‘rpm -qa | wc -l’ and write down result.
Run ‘rpm -qa | grep fc8 > fc8-packages-in-fc9-upgrade’
Install Fedora 9
Install Fedora 9 with Fedora-9-i386-DVD.iso , default installation.
Update system with ‘yum update’
Reboot
Run ‘yum update’ again
Run ‘yum clean all’
Run ‘df -h’ and write down result.
Run ‘rpm -qa | wc -l’ and write down result.
Run ‘rpm -qa | grep fc8 > fc8-packages-in-fc9-fresh-install’
Results
Fedora 8 default install: 3.1G
Number of install rpm’s: 879
Fedora 9 upgraded from Fedora 8: 3.3G
Number of install rpm’s: 951
Number reported during upgrade: 879
fc8 packages:
fedorainfinity-gdm-theme-8.0.1-1.fc8.noarch
system-config-soundcard-2.0.6-11.fc8.noarch
xorg-x11-drv-nsc-2.8.1-4.fc8.i386
ql23xx-firmware-3.03.20-1.fc8.1.noarch
kacst-fonts-1.6.2-2.fc8.noarch
ql2100-firmware-1.19.38-1.fc8.1.noarch
sazanami-fonts-gothic-0.20040629-4.20061016.fc8.noarch
lklug-fonts-0.2.2-5.fc8.noarch
xorg-x11-drv-via-0.2.2-4.fc8.i386
xorg-x11-drv-cyrix-1.1.0-5.fc8.i386
redhat-lsb-3.1-19.fc8.i386
fedorainfinity-screensaver-theme-1.0.0-1.fc8.noarch
python-genshi-0.4.4-2.fc8.noarch
fedora-icon-theme-1.0.0-1.fc8.noarch
paktype-fonts-2.0-2.fc8.noarch
jomolhari-fonts-0.003-4.fc8.noarch
fedora-gnome-theme-8.0.0-1.fc8.noarch
python-setuptools-0.6c7-2.fc8.noarch
xorg-x11-fonts-truetype-7.2-3.fc8.noarch
fedora-screensaver-theme-1.0.0-1.fc8.noarch
gtk-sharp2-2.10.3-3.fc8.i386
ql2200-firmware-2.02.08-1.fc8.1.noarch
ghostscript-fonts-5.50-18.fc8.noarch
ql2400-firmware-4.00.27-1.fc8.1.noarch
cjkunifonts-uming-0.1.20060928-4.fc8.noarch
Fedora 9 default install: 3.1GB
Number of install rpm’s: 930
fc8 packages:
ql2400-firmware-4.00.27-1.fc8.1.noarch
ql2200-firmware-2.02.08-1.fc8.1.noarch
ql2100-firmware-1.19.38-1.fc8.1.noarch
paktype-fonts-2.0-2.fc8.noarch
lklug-fonts-0.2.2-5.fc8.noarch
ql23xx-firmware-3.03.20-1.fc8.1.noarch
kacst-fonts-1.6.2-2.fc8.noarch
abyssinica-fonts-1.0-2.fc8.noarch
ghostscript-fonts-5.50-18.fc8.noarch
python-genshi-0.4.4-2.fc8.noarch
fedora-icon-theme-1.0.0-1.fc8.noarch
fedora-gnome-theme-8.0.0-1.fc8.noarch
redhat-lsb-3.1-19.fc8.i386
jomolhari-fonts-0.003-4.fc8.noarch
python-setuptools-0.6c7-2.fc8.noarch
cjkunifonts-uming-0.1.20060928-4.fc8.noarch
fedora-screensaver-theme-1.0.0-1.fc8.noarch
fedorainfinity-screensaver-theme-1.0.0-1.fc8.noarch
Conclusion
Now this is not that bad, considering that the default install size is almost 1GB bigger than Ubuntu. I still wonder why there is fc8 packages in Fedora 9.
The upgrading procedure took ages! I didn’t note the exact time, but 1.5hour is not far from it.
May 20th, 2008 at 10:10:38
Comparing distribution sizes without listing the package differences isn’t comparing the same thing at all. Doing a live cd installation on both distros might yeild comparable sizes but again the package set is different.
All the packages aren’t necessarily rebuild for every revision. If older packages aren’t updated during that time and the toolset hasn’t changed, Fedora 8 packages are just carried forward to Fedora 9.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:11:01
It was not meant for comparing distribution sizes. It was just to show that Fedora is better than Ubuntu to take care of its own cruft left by old packages, even if Fedora takes more disk space.