Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 08:58:27 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org> Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf GENERIC src/sys/alpha/conf GENERIC src/sys/sparc64/conf GENERIC src/sys/amd64/conf GENERIC src/sys/pc98/conf GENERIC Message-ID: <20031209165827.GA18959@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20031209070020.GC59494@perrin.nxad.com> References: <200312072352.hB7Nqsw6011333@repoman.freebsd.org> <20031208190305.GA956@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> <20031209070020.GC59494@perrin.nxad.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 11:00:20PM -0800, Sean Chittenden wrote: > Not that I'm particularly involved with this aspect of things, but I > just burnt myself a CD image for the data center and found that I > didn't have room for the 50+MB debug kernel and debug modules, but I > was stunned at how well it did compress (~69%). ... > Given the time difference between unzipping between bzip2/gzip (pretty > small, esp compared to the time required to bzip2/gzip something), I'm > surprised we don't make more liberal use of bzip2 on our releases. I > know packages are the big space consumer, but 3% here and there (20MB > of 660MB) adds up. > > Moving from gzip to bzip2 for the base files reduces the current size > of the base files by about 13-22%. I've been trying to move us to bzip2 for the base distribution files since 4.6 (2 years now). RE has blocked it before, but maybe it is time to revisit it again. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031209165827.GA18959>