Re: Possible abuse of dpkg-deb -z9 for xz compressed binary packages
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 07:32:49AM +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> At the time, we (font team) decided to go with z9, the fact that
> packages were arch:all (and therefore that the memory cost of
> compression had only an impact on the machine of the developer who
> builds packages), was a strong argument to go with z9.
>
> Of course, if we go to source only uploads for arch:all, we'll
> reconsider this and eventually revert to default settings.
>
> (still, this memory impact has never been one on the good old Dell
> Poweredge 2650 that sits in my garage and builds most of the font
> packages I upload..... Of course, it is not a buildd that builds
> hundreds of packages a day)
Decompression costs were mentioned too, and they always matter (if they
are significant). Does anyone have numbers about them?
--
WBR, wRAR
Reply to: