From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 29 23:40:38 2010 Return-Path: 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 CF5D21065670 for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 23:40:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from matthias.andree@gmx.de) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1E76B8FC14 for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 23:40:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 29 Nov 2010 23:40:36 -0000 Received: from f055154000.adsl.alicedsl.de (EHLO baloo.cs.uni-paderborn.de) [78.55.154.0] by mail.gmx.net (mp008) with SMTP; 30 Nov 2010 00:40:36 +0100 X-Authenticated: #428038 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19kMt1FY1FktobT7xSQyesuseADPjgc/ElQ4eDkyn IuSP+itzvUmDR0 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by baloo.cs.uni-paderborn.de with esmtp (Exim 4.70) (envelope-from ) id LCO73L-0004I4-8U for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 00:40:33 +0100 Message-ID: <4CF439F1.6050703@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 00:40:33 +0100 From: Matthias Andree User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <4CF38D7F.6070206@gmx.de> <4CF3F16E.3020501@DataIX.net> In-Reply-To: <4CF3F16E.3020501@DataIX.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Subject: Re: packages compressed with xz X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 23:40:38 -0000 Am 29.11.2010 19:31, schrieb jhell: > Adding to this, as the manual says... The decompressing host will need > to have at minimal 5% -> 20% of memory 'available' for decompression of > what the compressing host had. Seeing as FreeBSD still runs on systems > with memory as little as 200MB "~20% of 1024MB" and quite possible to > run on systems with memory of 64MB "~5% of 1024MB" I would not see any > benefit in modifying the default memory limit on a compressing host to > accommodate for these system rather than using gzip(1) or bzip2(1) by > default. You can specify limits during compression, so the question is should we do that so that hosts with N MB of RAM can decompress packages? Do we retain the compression ratio over bzip2 if we limit compression memory to 512 MB so that decompression would be possible with, say, 128 MB? > It would be nice to support xz(1) compression for large selective > packages like firefox or openoffice as those will never run on smaller > systems. Yes, would be nice. I doubt it will happen soon. -- Matthias Andree