Le Sat, May 12, 2012 at 07:33:49PM +0200, Adam Borowski a écrit : > > There is an easy solution: switch binary packages to xz compression. > > amd64's CD 1 is reduced to 2/3 of its current size (data from June(?) 2010). > > If you remember, I also did some research for the whole archive: > > Thread: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/08/msg00220.html > Raw data: http://angband.pl/deb/xz/debs.txt > > There is a misconception that only big packages are worth compressing. Ten > small packages give almost as good savings as one big. xz is indeed worse > than gzip for smallest packages (~1-2KB) but the total savings that could be > gained by a smart selection of the compression method are so small that > they're not worth any extra complexity.
In my experience, xz gives the biggest gains, like halving the size of a package, when its contents are rich in binary files. So if heuristics are needed, perhaps that could be a direction... Another gain from xz compression is mirror space. Consider the gain doubled when the same provider also has a Ubuntu mirror ! Disk space may be cheap, but they require energy to operate, and that is becoming something more and more precious in our world. Have a nice Sunday, -- Charles Plessy Debian Med packaging team, http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120512224558.ga19...@falafel.plessy.net