You are not logged in.

#1 2003-08-13 11:57:36

Bobonov
Member
From: Roma - Italy
Registered: 2003-05-07
Posts: 295

bz2 support for package??

I know that it is going to save up just some byte and is not a big difference, but may be is a start.
Basically my proposal came out for 2 reason.
1) people 2 "complaing" about download time (I do not see the reason, if you want any system to be up to date you have have to download patch and  upgrade son is not Arch fault)
2) arch is groving more and more and it can help to keep it on one cd for some time more

Offline

#2 2003-08-13 12:53:46

dp
Member
From: Zürich, Switzerland
Registered: 2003-05-27
Posts: 3,366
Website

Re: bz2 support for package??

i agree, that bz2 can be useful for packages ... if both most popular compression methods are supported, it would be nice



Bobonov wrote:

[...]
2) arch is groving more and more and it can help to keep it on one cd for some time more

-> arch is growing, yes, but as long as "unofficial" is growing much faster than "official", arch can stay on one CD for long time


The impossible missions are the only ones which succeed.

Offline

#3 2003-08-13 15:27:38

sarah31
Member
From: Middle of Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 2,975
Website

Re: bz2 support for package??

well bzips take less space yes but requires many more processes to decompress.


AKA uknowme

I am not your friend

Offline

#4 2003-08-13 15:43:41

tyme
Member
From: PA
Registered: 2003-06-12
Posts: 139
Website

Re: bz2 support for package??

gzip just tends to be more standard than bzip2...and using two different types of packaging would be redundant.  use one or the other, but supporting both is just a waste of effort.  IMHO

Offline

#5 2003-08-13 17:07:20

Moritz
Member
From: Cologne, NRW, Germany
Registered: 2002-10-12
Posts: 166

Re: bz2 support for package??

Offline

#6 2003-08-14 09:11:33

Bobonov
Member
From: Roma - Italy
Registered: 2003-05-07
Posts: 295

Re: bz2 support for package??

Of course as everithing bz2 has pro and contr.
+ smaller file ( between 5-10% - more near to 10% - less compared to gzip)
- more memory required to decompress file
- more cpu time required to decompress file
By looking at this I could say "ok lets stay with gzip" but considering the particoular use we do in Arch:
often download of  update
arch iso is approcching 1 cd limit (now is 641952 kb, from 0.4 to .05 there was an increase of about 100000kb in size)

May be now it is not very necessary to move to bz2, but before going to 2 cd distribution I would like to have it on one CD for a bit more.
By considering a 5% (in the worst case) gain over gzip, it allow you 30MB of space before switching to a 2 cd distribution.

Offline

#7 2003-08-14 17:12:19

dp
Member
From: Zürich, Switzerland
Registered: 2003-05-27
Posts: 3,366
Website

Re: bz2 support for package??

Bobonov wrote:

May be now it is not very necessary to move to bz2, but before going to 2 cd distribution I would like to have it on one CD for a bit more.
By considering a 5% (in the worst case) gain over gzip, it allow you 30MB of space before switching to a 2 cd distribution.

30MB is actually nothing for a great distribution to fill :-) ... if you add some nice pkgs, they are filled in an afternoon

-> my opinion about the 1- or more-CD-problem:

::: If there is more then 1 CD (and this case will be soon i think) in the distro, the additional CDs must be facultativly for the installation of a basic system (= i want to be able to install a basic system with only the first CD)

::: Having more CDs (with the full repository) is great if you do not have 24h a fast internet connection and so you can download the distro once and then install it from CDs on an other computer (with all additional packages that exist!)


The impossible missions are the only ones which succeed.

Offline

#8 2003-08-14 17:22:47

sarah31
Member
From: Middle of Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 2,975
Website

Re: bz2 support for package??

the goal is to keep arch a one cd distribution. regardless of repository changes in the near future what was offered on .5 iso will pretty well remain the maximum cd offerings.


AKA uknowme

I am not your friend

Offline

#9 2003-08-14 19:20:20

deepfreeze
Member
From: NJ
Registered: 2002-12-27
Posts: 86

Re: bz2 support for package??

The base-only iso is only about 170MB...far less than 700MB or whatever will fit on a CD these days. I think this is especially good for people on dialup because why would you download a 680 MB iso if you are only going to need 400MB of the information on there? Wouldn't it make more sense to download the 170MB base iso and then pacman install the rest later? Yes it is a long download time, but the dl time is comparitively far less if you can selectively pick and choose what you want/need as opposed to getting all possible packages.


My hovercraft is full of eels.

Offline

#10 2003-08-14 19:35:27

jlvsimoes
Member
From: portugal
Registered: 2002-12-23
Posts: 392
Website

Re: bz2 support for package??

i remenber the days off sleepeless nigts clic clic with the mouse on the redhat menus instal this instal that , this needs this , that needs some other .
" i feel sleepy "
ops formated my un-backup home with ext2


-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GU/ d- s: a- C L U P+ L+++ E--- W+
N 0+ K- W-- !O !M V-- PS+ PE- V++ PGP T 5 Z+ R* TV+ B+
DI-- D- G-- e-- h! r++ z+ z*
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Offline

#11 2003-08-14 20:42:12

terrapin
Member
From: Lockport, IL
Registered: 2003-08-06
Posts: 104

Re: bz2 support for package??

deepfreeze wrote:

The base-only iso is only about 170MB... Wouldn't it make more sense to download the 170MB base iso and then pacman install the rest later? Yes it is a long download time, but the dl time is comparitively far less if you can selectively pick and choose what you want/need as opposed to getting all possible packages.

I agree with deepfreeze.  The base-iso is very nice indeed.  smile

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB