Re: bzip2 compressed files
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, you wrote:
>> I believe that eventually bzip2 support should be added to dselect and
>> dpkg (I would like to have packages such as xbooks compressed by bzip2).
>
>That would be nice as an additional option...
>
>> I doubt that 180K would be added if it became base_2.2.tbz2, in fact
>> it would probably be smaller.
>
>...but I wouldn't do that *and* remove that .tgz completely, or
>hhaving all the .debs converted to tbz2.
I agree, we're not ready for that yet. However we only need bzip2 in the base
if we have bzip2 compressed .deb packages in the main sections. If only
xbooks, dictionaries, and bible references are bzip2 compressed then most people
won't need bzip2.
>BTW if we leave the tgz-inside debs along with tbz2-inside ones, the
>mirror list would shorten, because it would double (already alarming :)
>archive size.
Definately not! Maybe we should have two copies of the package files and
contents files as they get downloaded more often. However I strongly believe
that packages such as xbooks should only be available with bzip2 compression.
--
I am in London and would like to meet any Linux users here.
I plan to work in London for 6 months and then I might move to some other
place where the pay is good.
Reply to: