[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFC: provide Packages.bz2 files



In article <[🔎] 199904132009.QAA20735@clifford.livenet.net>,
shaleh@clifford.livenet.net writes

>> Just a thought - quick check:
>> 
>> 442132 Apr 13 21:46 ftp.debian.org_debian_dists_potato_main_binary-
>i386_Packages.bz2
>> 589652 Apr 13 21:45 ftp.debian.org_debian_dists_potato_main_binary-
>i386_Packages.gz
>> 
>> 
>> Allowing .bz2 here will save 25% of the time to get them by FTP !
>> If noone steps to implement this in dinstall and apt, I may even get
>> the source and do it myself !!
>
>Look in the archives for the opinion on bz2.  On less than midrange
>pentiums bzip2 is quite slow.

I think an option in the config file would be a very good idea. It could
even suggest enabling it if (dpkg -l bzip2 | grep "^ii") returns
successfully.

Maybe this could even be extended with a new field in the Packages files
Bzip-available: yes
for packages like the kernel-source-* packages in which case, if the
option were enabled, apt would get package.bz2.deb instead of just
package.deb, although this would require dpkg to be able to handle
{data|control}.tar.gz.

Although, thinking about it, in the case of the kernel, is there any
reason there isn't a kernel-source-version-bz2 which provides the kernel
source bz2'd? I don't see any argument against this alternative bar the
tenuous one of mirror size.

>100k is not much of a diff, even over
>my modem.

It is when you're doing it weekly or even daily.

-- 
Ian Lynagh - ian@lynagh.demon.co.uk
http://www.lynagh.demon.co.uk/

In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very
angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.


Reply to: