From owner-freebsd-current Sat Dec 5 12:39:13 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA08482 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sat, 5 Dec 1998 12:39:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from top.worldcontrol.com (snblitz.sc.scruznet.com [165.227.132.84]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id MAA08477 for ; Sat, 5 Dec 1998 12:39:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brian@worldcontrol.com) From: brian@worldcontrol.com Received: (qmail 6902 invoked by uid 100); 5 Dec 1998 20:43:24 -0000 Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 12:43:24 -0800 To: obrien@NUXI.com, van.woerkom@netcologne.de, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bzip2 - worthy successor to gzip? Message-ID: <19981205124324.A6892@top.worldcontrol.com> Mail-Followup-To: obrien@NUXI.com, van.woerkom@netcologne.de, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG References: <199812042331.AAA02402@oranje.my.domain> <19981205020718.A12672@nuxi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.94.9i In-Reply-To: <19981205020718.A12672@nuxi.com>; from David O'Brien on Sat, Dec 05, 1998 at 02:07:18AM -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Today, while fetching egcs, I noticed that those folks use bzip2 for > compressing their snapshots: A problem I find with bzip2 is that it becomes unimaginably slow when compressing certain types of data. The slowness is documented. I've not found it a good general purpose compressor. However, I do use bzip2 extensively, while using gzip for those cases where bzip2 falls down. -- Brian Litzinger To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message