From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Jul  7 21:35:52 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2054106564A
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Sat,  7 Jul 2012 21:35:52 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-bk0-f54.google.com (mail-bk0-f54.google.com
	[209.85.214.54])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D8728FC08
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Sat,  7 Jul 2012 21:35:52 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by bkcje9 with SMTP id je9so4679113bkc.13
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Sat, 07 Jul 2012 14:35:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:cc:content-type;
	bh=3voBe1OGVOESbnLDsW1NvLnmOd/8c0+TL3pRRoh2F/I=;
	b=pxvBG9orK05yqIbDkZfiK8sYV9Eu2ZZGHQ05pwzqDP460NqLKXiOZIYXkmCFyWG3Y6
	pXd/f0GIpG8ZrZpPK9XOdz1r+iyYfxynf4dGjpntFoBDSh5MVVF+6nGs2emdVdnyPeUV
	LvorEqrg+xwek/EnfrCbhqAs1cEb3CbC4JHBkRYuU/i1355c3W0aLDch9hmC2csGiz5B
	uCUYYVKyKqZEKXYC0oTBGB6X3gp6JpvfaRx3wgvwxCcBg1aJRzSzjEbOHtWED8iib19k
	s3a7rvJQ4BwZ/6pzKI9iTGKbNrEFzTHE+FPBs3tLu9POZRuCgO8Fh+hOMNt3Mhxj8MOo
	c23g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.204.152.27 with SMTP id e27mr17153140bkw.56.1341696951132;
	Sat, 07 Jul 2012 14:35:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.204.49.87 with HTTP; Sat, 7 Jul 2012 14:35:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.204.49.87 with HTTP; Sat, 7 Jul 2012 14:35:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20120707191830.GA83424@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk>
References: <20120707191830.GA83424@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2012 22:35:51 +0100
Message-ID: <CADLo838Qr9cxC3wChixtGJt=6uhdPNOY-C7zPPRVUzLc2XMrFg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com>
To: Anton Shterenlikht <mexas@bristol.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5
Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: compress INDEX with xz, instead of bz2?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2012 21:35:52 -0000

On Jul 7, 2012 8:19 PM, "Anton Shterenlikht" <mexas@bristol.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> A very minor point
>
> # make fetchindex
> /usr/ports/INDEX-10.bz2                       100% of 1621 kB  208 kBps
> # ls -al INDEX-10
> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel  26284787 Jul  7 20:08 INDEX-10
> # xz INDEX-10
> # ls -al INDEX-10.xz
> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel  1350156 Jul  7 20:08 INDEX-10.xz
> #
>
> So xz saves ~19% compared to bz2 for this file.
>
> Now that xz is in the base,
> perhaps making INDEX available compressed
> with xz would help some people who are still
> on slow download lines.

We still have to support 7.x, which does not have xz.

Chris