On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 16:43:03 +0100 Pawel Jakub Dawidek <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 03:46:36PM +0200, Alexandr Rybalko wrote: > > On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:02:32 +0100 > > Ivan Voras <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> On 20/01/2011 16:51, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > >> > Well, creating a generic geom_compress module shouldn't > > >> > increase the size by all that much. It's just a few function > > >> > pointers that point at the decompression class. The rest of > > >> > the format is the same, right? (ie, how it's broken into > > >> > chunks, the chunks are separately compressed, etc.) > > >> > > >> I think they are talking about the size of the kernel :) > > > > Exact match :) > > > > But really, gzip in most cases already compiled into kernel (my > > not) and anyway have small footprint. > > > > So I done join GEOM_UZIP + GEOM_ULZMA module, called GEOM_ULZMA > > yet. > > > > Module name open for discussion :) > > Since they must have short and understandable name. > > Maybe GEOM_COMPR, > > maybe full GEOM_COMPRESSION, > > maybe GEOM_REDUCE, > > etc. > > What's wrong with GEOM_COMPRESS? We already have equally long or > longer class names: > > GEOM_LINUX_LVM > GEOM_MOUNTVER > GEOM_MULTIPATH > GEOM_SUNLABEL > > -- > Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheelsystems.com > [email protected] http://www.FreeBSD.org > FreeBSD committer Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! So as result of small discussion (thanks Ivan and Pawel Jakub) think best name is GEOM_UCOMPRESS (module do only UN-compress). WBW -- Aleksandr Rybalko <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-geom To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
