From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 7 13:30:26 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D56C37B401 for ; Wed, 7 May 2003 13:30:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from falcon.midgard.homeip.net (h76n3fls20o913.telia.com [213.67.148.76]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C6ACA43FA3 for ; Wed, 7 May 2003 13:30:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ertr1013@student.uu.se) Received: (qmail 48968 invoked by uid 1001); 7 May 2003 20:30:19 -0000 Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 22:30:19 +0200 From: Erik Trulsson To: Narvi Message-ID: <20030507203018.GA48927@falcon.midgard.homeip.net> Mail-Followup-To: Narvi , Matthias Buelow , current@freebsd.org References: <20030507185153.GA14729@moghedien.mukappabeta.net> <20030507223638.D40030-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030507223638.D40030-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i cc: Matthias Buelow cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: bzip2(1) compression for manpages, Groff and Texinfo docs X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 20:30:26 -0000 On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 10:49:16PM +0300, Narvi wrote: > > On Wed, 7 May 2003, Matthias Buelow wrote: > > > Narvi writes: > > > > >Really - except for a very limited set of streaming applications with hard > > >latency rules, going away from gzip to a BWT based compressors is a Very > > >Good Thing (tm). > > > > for things like manpages and texinfo-files, even compress(1) would be > > more than sufficient, if it weren't for license issues (but then again, > > compress is still included, so what.) And it surely is a lot faster, > > especially than bzip2. > > I definately don't agree on texinfo files - these aren't all that small. > For example, the sizes of gcc.info.gz vs gcc.info.bz2 are: > > 306122 May 7 22:40 gcc.info.bz2 > 400320 May 7 22:41 gcc.info.gz > > which is a quite significant difference. I picked the file because of size > and not change of compression ratio, or check all the files (just in case > there are any benchmarking paranoids around). On the speed side, the speed > of bunzip2 only matters if the speed difference between it and gunzip were > user perceptible on even not really up to date at all hardware, which is > not the case AFAICT. Here you are wrong. On old hardware the difference in speed (and the difference in memory needed) between bunzip2 and gunzip is quite noticable. -- Erik Trulsson ertr1013@student.uu.se