From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 5 17:56:36 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB6D510656A4; Sun, 5 Dec 2010 17:56:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from c.kworr@gmail.com) Received: from mail-fx0-f54.google.com (mail-fx0-f54.google.com [209.85.161.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F6318FC16; Sun, 5 Dec 2010 17:56:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fxm16 with SMTP id 16so8799126fxm.13 for ; Sun, 05 Dec 2010 09:56:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:newsgroups:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=PGQtNSC+Q+ING+jtoVBOpHl4xPW0orZ8ZeExjN8sKNs=; b=oQIzvhgip1xySh8fli5ReaNNWKFoPslk9oolbOYvRCR1ofuDLegmDqBhTPSM4boZrb 9sB0oAoozP6Bp83xNInra+lakQ6wCJRUzf4VROKg8wMHox3f1xtvMbJSDo+xYvicuMAJ T65egY8h6B2d7dKqpLFkICw6P0ceHBVFnfRks= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:newsgroups:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=TBaJW8JBgcBRRtIbknjw2QesB2SkcbXN3zaFMfEstckO4GamLJEk7fzxTtDdEWUb1W ShgS6qfQkrDPN0Nzj3m9j4RWCI5OexR0EKxmate/I53xPcdDvd8jHSyvwIvZ8n8yzAV1 w4gOfUnNbDJnAnuTf5WZ/57Hx7ugNj2Ua+Avw= Received: by 10.223.112.16 with SMTP id u16mr539359fap.113.1291571794029; Sun, 05 Dec 2010 09:56:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from limbo.lan ([193.33.173.33]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l3sm258718fan.2.2010.12.05.09.56.31 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 05 Dec 2010 09:56:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4CFBD24C.6020305@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2010 19:56:28 +0200 From: Volodymyr Kostyrko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; uk-UA; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101029 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: gmane.os.freebsd.devel.ports To: Ion-Mihai Tetcu References: <4CF38D7F.6070206@gmx.de> <4CF3F16E.3020501@DataIX.net> <4CF439F1.6050703@gmx.de> <4CF95C27.4030507@gmail.com> <20101205180354.085e5b04@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <20101205180354.085e5b04@it.buh.tecnik93.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Matthias Andree , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Julien Laffaye Subject: Re: packages compressed with xz X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2010 17:56:36 -0000 05.12.2010 18:03, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: >> And those ones are all empty at start. So say, if you are compressing >> something really huge trying to use 4G of memory you end using that >> much memory between 2G - 3G of source data. And we will need 512MB to >> decompress that hunk of data. >> >> Are the packages _that_ large? > [ .. ] > > The biggest package that can be produced by a port it's a bit over 10G. > 0k, I'll try to be sharper. How many of that huge packages will run on a prehistoric cpu/64Mb mem combo? I'll bet even working with the OpenOffice will be... challenging. Let's take the other route. Packages that large will benefit from maximum xz compression most. The question clearly is "Would we like to ditch maximum compression for those huge ones taking care of the hardware that would never be ready to run them?" Don't listen to me anyway. Our first goal is clearly making FreeBSD work everywhere. Capping the xz limits would do nothing for me personally because all of my machines are capable of building any software I want - I don't use packages at all. So I don't have a right to vote. We should think from the point of people running that hardware. And I think we should support them. -- Sphinx of black quartz judge my vow.