From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Nov 12 18:07:38 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id SAA03037 for questions-outgoing; Wed, 12 Nov 1997 18:07:38 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions) Received: from zippy.dyn.ml.org (spain-39.ppp.hooked.net [206.169.228.39]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA03030 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 1997 18:07:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from garbanzo@hooked.net) Received: from localhost (garbanzo@localhost) by zippy.dyn.ml.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA01429; Wed, 12 Nov 1997 18:07:55 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: zippy.dyn.ml.org: garbanzo owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 18:07:54 -0800 (PST) From: Alex X-Sender: garbanzo@zippy.dyn.ml.org To: Scott Morris cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: gzipped programs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 12 Nov 1997, Scott Morris wrote: > Steve, > > You can pretty much assume that if you gzip a file in the bin directories > it will be a Bad Thing(tm). The level of badness will depend on the > particular file you zip. You really don't gain much if anything by > compressing binaries anyway. You can compress old logfiles and such but > stay away from configs etc. Of course if you installed the source you can > compress or remove it if you need the space. I am a little clueless here, but why is it a bad thing to do this? I just compressed BitchX with what seems like a 50% ratio, and with the pseudo device gzip, it seems to work fine. - alex