[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openbsd-ports
Subject:    Re: RFC#8 - bzip2
From:       Peter Valchev <pvalchev () sightly ! net>
Date:       2003-02-26 21:45:43
[Download RAW message or body]

> Request to import bzip2 in the official src tree.
..
> Look at how many Mbytes you could save downloading 3.3 snapshots:
..
Personally, I don't care.

Look:
(vax tmp 42)$ time (bzip2 -d ezm3-1.0-src.tar.bz2; tar xf ezm3-1.0-src.tar)
  541.11s real   183.80s user    38.87s system
(vax tmp 43)$ rm -rf ezm3-1.0; time tar zxf ezm3-1.0-src.tar.gz            
  184.82s real     1.62s user    28.46s system

-rw-rw-r--  1 pvalchev  wsrc   8884638 Feb 25 04:52 ./ezm3-1.0-src.tar.gz
-rw-rw-r--  1 pvalchev  wsrc   6128550 Dec 30  2001 ./ezm3-1.0-src.tar.bz2

That's about 30% space saving.

BUT almost 300% slowdown (3 times slower).  As can be seen, bzip2
completely trashes my CPU.

Which do I think I value more when I build the release packages?  That's
right, I couldn't care less for the 2 extra MB (which I download only
once, and then do dozens of builds), while I do care if I would spend 5
extra minutes per package per build.  In the end, that's what the ports
tree is for - to ease us to build packages, and time is important.

Come on, disk space is cheap these days.

If that really bothers you, just use the prebuilt packages.  I am really
against moving towards bzip2 distfiles everywhere by default, since it
simply does not gain much.  Now, to make it optional is another
possibility, but that adds unnecessary complexity (you will have to
check that both distfiles can be downloaded, and most people will forget
to do that).  So it will probably just stay the way it is - learn to
live with it.

-Peter

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]