Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 22:16:45 -0500 (EST) From: Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com> To: murray@FreeBSD.org Cc: jkh@winston.freebsd.org, jhb@FreeBSD.org, winter@jurai.net, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, obrien@FreeBSD.org, pst@pst.org, des@ofug.org, imp@village.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/sysinstall install.c installUpgrade Message-ID: <200204040316.g343GjnF002809@aldan.algebra.com> In-Reply-To: <20020403233126.GL29594@freebsdmall.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 3 Apr, Murray Stokely wrote: > On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 01:27:03PM -0500, Mikhail Teterin wrote: >> Oh, "experience" -- what a great marketing word! It isn't pleasant, >> if each package is 20% bigger than it can be (.gz vs. bz2) and >> someone is advocating another 20% (?) bump (.zip vs. tar.gz). And >> why? Because > > Doubling numbers to make a point doesn't do much for your > credibility. Please... > The FreeBSD 4.3 package set (disc1) is about 10% smaller when > compressed with bzip2, not 20%. Someone on portmgr recently ran the > same test with the 4.5 packages and came up with the same number > (~10%). Did not know about that particular experiment. With a random .gz vs. .bz2 one's mileage can vary, and the 20% I quoted is certainly within the range. > David O'Brien is working on adding bzip2 support for packages, > distributions, and kernel modules to sysinstall. I agree that moving > to bzip2 will make CD-ROM installs more pleasant. Right. But the talk surfaced about moving to .zip -- and I paniced :) -mi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200204040316.g343GjnF002809>