Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 19 Dec 1995 11:01:00 -0700 (MST)
From:      Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
To:        nate@rocky.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams)
Cc:        terry@lambert.org, nate@rocky.sri.MT.net, questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: undump program
Message-ID:  <199512191801.LAA14830@phaeton.artisoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <199512191751.KAA26854@rocky.sri.MT.net> from "Nate Williams" at Dec 19, 95 10:51:15 am

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > No, it means that your statement is tantamount to the claims of a 50%
> > size reduction for *any* file using a recoverable compression algorithm.
> 
> I made no such claims.  I said the dumped version was faster than the
> un-dumped version.  I stand behind that claim.  I live in the real world
> and work with 'real' tools, not something which should exist but
> doesn't.
> 
> We don't have check-pointing, nor was that even an issue until you
> brought it up.  The request was for an 'undump' program so an individual
> could dump a perl binary and ship it.  He didn't want a discussion on
> the relative merits of bload/bsave, checkpointing, or how useless it is.

Well, then; give him an "undump" program.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199512191801.LAA14830>