From owner-cvs-all  Tue Feb  6 15:14:23 2001
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from iguana.aciri.org (iguana.aciri.org [192.150.187.36])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 2B0FD37B503; Tue,  6 Feb 2001 15:14:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from rizzo@localhost)
	by iguana.aciri.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f16NDus45358;
	Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:13:56 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from rizzo)
From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@aciri.org>
Message-Id: <200102062313.f16NDus45358@iguana.aciri.org>
Subject: Re: bzip2 (was cvs commit: ...)
In-Reply-To: <13548.981500989@winston.osd.bsdi.com> from Jordan Hubbard at "Feb 6, 2001  3: 9:49 pm"
To: jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com (Jordan Hubbard)
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:13:56 -0800 (PST)
Cc: mi@aldan.algebra.com, obrien@FreeBSD.org, sheldonh@uunet.co.za,
	cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> > Bzip2  has a  more  liberal  license and  is  a  better (more  efficient
> > usually) compressor.  It is also  being actively maintained.  Some Linux
> > distros come  with man-pages bzip2-ed  instead of gzip-ed too.  IMHO, we
> > should use it.

my understanding is that bzip* is _way_ slower than gzip
due to the algorithm used. Unless we really care the 5-10%
savings in size, i'd rather _not_ use it, for portability
and backward compatibility reasons.

	cheers
	luigi

> Does bzip offer any backwards compatability with gzip, e.g. if we
> bundled bzip in /usr/bin instead of gzip, would a hardlink to bzip
> under the name "gzip" still DTRT with .gz files?
> 
> - Jordan
> 
> 



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message