Re: Suggestion to and how to alow different compression for .debs
Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net> writes:
>
> > Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> > > Whats complicated about using uncompress.sh instead of gzip and
> > > fallback to gzip if not present?
> >
> > Tons of things. What about programs called in uncompress.sh -- are
> > dependancies supposed to be fullfilled then? What happens when the script
> > fails? What if you don't trust debian, but want to unpack a debian package
> > anyway, without running any scripts from it?
> >
> > What about speed?
>
> It takes 2 hours to download X sources, 15-30 minutes to bunzip2 them
> and 24 Hours to compile the stuff (slink X on an MC68060). Do you
> realy think saving 10 minutes by using gzip2 and adding about 30% of
> size to the download is faster?
I'm talking about _uncompress_speed_.
Since BenC already has bzip2 .deb's implementedm in pure C, going through
some shell script to make them work instead is obviously going to be slower.
> What about rar or mathematical/fractal compressors? For some data far
> better compression can be gained with a specialised packer.
You're going overboard. Debian should not use compression methords like rar
that are non-free. Nor should it use archive formats, like rar, that do not
include unix permissions and ownership information.
When a good unix fractal compression format comes along, we can talk.
--
see shy jo
Reply to: