Re: How about using bzip2 as the standard *.deb compression format?
Christopher Barry <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> If your mighty 386/25
a) cut out the sarcasm, it's uncalled for.
b) get your facts right, it's not a 386, it's a 386/25 equivalent
as I said already.
> with 4MB can make World the entire X distribution and custom kernels
> then surely it won't sweat a little bit of bzip2 decompressing...
I didn't say it wouldn't; I was trying to point out what complete
rubbish "Old/slow/lomem machines can't properly compile X or Mozilla
I'm not interested in the bzip2 discussion per se, because it seems
like your average Debian discussion, with lots of people ra-ra-ing but
no danger of anyone actually getting down and doing any real work.
> and since you spend a lot less time downloading a bzip2ed *.deb,
That depends entirely on one's network connection. The time saved on
my network connection for the previous 3 years wouldn't have actually
> the extra time bzip2 would take by swapping and thrashing the disk
> should balance out nicely.
IYO and IYE. Mileage does vary.
 It's actually a 68030@16 with the mother of all brain dead
motherboard designs which slows it down by a factor of 2 or so. As
you can see, I'm not overly proud of the machine, quite the opposite