El Tue, 23 Sep 2014 02:23:43 -0300 Alexandre Oliva <[email protected]> escribió: > Hello, Matias, > > On Sep 18, 2014, "Matias A. Fonzo" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Have you considered to use sourceforge as alternative?. It has > > mirrors around the world. > > Not really. But how would it have helped? I surely wouldn't entrust > the primary copy of the source tarballs to it, so I'd have to keep > them on our server anyway...
Of course not. The good thing is that SourceForge has a network of mirrors which represents availability around the world. Even if SourceForge is down or are prohibiting access to other countries. You would have a copy somewhere. > > Why? Lzip can compress more than xz with a bit of tuning via > > --options. > > Maybe it can, but when I compared the sizes of the files to decide > which one to keep, .xz files were consistently (if slightly) smaller > than .lz ones. > > Maybe I'm not using the best options to compress tarballs, vcdiffs and > xdeltas with lzip. Suggestions are certainly welcome. Probably `lzip -m64 -s64MiB' should be enough. This is equal to the values of xz (match-length and dictionary size). Of course, this will increase the memory usage in the decompression, because the dictionary size has been incremented. In any case, consumes less memory than xz: http://mattmahoney.net/dc/text.html (See the Ranking) > > And it is not forcing users to possess a lot of memory to > > decompress .xz. > > That is a point I was not aware of, so I had not taken into account. > > > Lzip was designed for long-term archiving, having a > > tool to recover corrupt files. > > I very much doubt it could recover corrupt files to the point that the > original signature would match, because that would require a lot of > redundancy to be added, which is the opposite of what a compressor is > supposed to do. And if the original signature doesn't match, I > wouldn't trust the result, especially given that we have alternate > paths to obtain the tarballs. I'm not the right person to answer. I think Antonio is subscribed to the list, he can give the details. > > Ideal for linux-libre, especially because > > it is under the GPL. > > Yup, lzip remains the promoted compression format in the GNU > Linux-libre Free Software Directory page. > > Thanks for your feedback and for educating me on another aspect in > which lzip is superior, > Thanks for linux-libre. Take care, Matias _______________________________________________ linux-libre mailing list [email protected] http://www.fsfla.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-libre
