bz2 support for package??

Bobonov · 2003-08-13 11:57:36

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

dp · 2003-08-13 12:53:46

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

sarah31 · 2003-08-13 15:27:38

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

tyme · 2003-08-13 15:43:41

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

Moritz · 2003-08-13 17:07:20

we allready got that: http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?t=787

Bobonov · 2003-08-14 09:11:33

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.

dp · 2003-08-14 17:12:19

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!)

sarah31 · 2003-08-14 17:22:47

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.

deepfreeze · 2003-08-14 19:20:20

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.

jlvsimoes · 2003-08-14 19:35:27

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

terrapin · 2003-08-14 20:42:12

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.

Arch Linux

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

bz2 support for package??

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

Re: bz2 support for package??

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

Re: bz2 support for package??

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

Re: bz2 support for package??

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

Re: bz2 support for package??

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

Re: bz2 support for package??

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

Re: bz2 support for package??

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

Re: bz2 support for package??

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

Re: bz2 support for package??

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

Re: bz2 support for package??

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

Re: bz2 support for package??

Board footer