Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 13:39:47 +0200 From: Alexandr Rybalko <ray@dlink.ua> To: Ulf Lilleengen <lulf@pvv.ntnu.no> Cc: geom@freebsd.org, embedded@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: GEOM_ULZMA Message-ID: <20100304133947.2fa4e66f.ray@dlink.ua> In-Reply-To: <20100304102158.GA8092@nobby.geeknest.org> References: <20100219163644.da89e882.ray@dlink.ua> <20100304102158.GA8092@nobby.geeknest.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 11:21:59 +0100 Ulf Lilleengen <lulf@pvv.ntnu.no> wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 04:36:44PM +0200, Alexandr Rybalko wrote: >> > Hi, >> > I wrote a module GEOM_ULZMA (such as GEOM_UZIP, but compression with lzma), in connection with this is an issue best left >> > lzma code in the file "geom_ulzma.c" or store lzma library separately. If separately, then where better? >> > >> > Maybe in future make lzma and gzip library kernel interface for embedded? >> > Then in one instance of code, userland can use compression via kernel. >> > >> >> What are the cons against combining uzip/ulzma into a geom_z/geom_compress >> module that can support different compression schemes? I think this makes >> more sense than having different geom modules for each compression scheme. I agree with you, since this modules need for reducing sizes, so user need configure what type they need. >> >> -- >> Ulf Lilleengen -- Рыбалко Александр Консультант D-Link Украина
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100304133947.2fa4e66f.ray>