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

Re: [proposal] use xz compression for Debian package by default

On 29/08/12 15:01, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:56:47PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>> Before wondering whether PNG files should have an additional
>> compression level, is there any reason why a better PNG compression
>> isn't used in the first place? For instance, "optipng -o9" tries
>> various parameters and keeps the best one.
> So recompress upstream PNGs and suffix +dfsg to the source version? There might
> be some disadvantages to this. If you are using VCS to manage the package, you
> are probably carrying the upstream PNGs in that already, so there's an
> appreciable increase in repository size to carry the optimized PNGs too.
> Another approach could be to inject optipng into the build process and treat
> the outputs like compiler output (packed into binary packages, thrown away on
> clean), but then repeated builds could be CPU-expensive.   Perhaps getting
> upstream to carry better-compressed PNGs in their next release is a good idea.

Better to create a dh_ plugin to do this. I think there is something
like that already floating around for PNGs, at least on Ubuntu the
pkgbinarymangler does re-compress all PNGs.

I don't think it's worth +dfsg, and CPU cycles will only be wasted once
on the maintainer side, since most of PNGs are in arch:all packages anyway.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: