On Tuesday January 26 2016 10:47:10 Vincent Habchi wrote: >I’ve applied René method, disabling SIP while compressing /Applications. It >gave me some significant savings, thus I surmise all the applications are not >compressed. Xcode is, though, but things like iWorks (Pages, etc.) are not.
Xcode can be slimmed down significantly by getting rid of unneeded SDKs (and IIRC that doesn't require you to re-codesign it). HFS compression is unstable in the sense that it gets lost when you rewrite the file. That's why commands like rsync have options to preserve compression. The lack of a user-space command to compress files shows that it isn't really intended as a tool for mere mortal users to save disk space. You could say that's because it's not in Apple's interest (they also sell disk space) but it becomes a bit easier to understand when you look at afsctool.c . Applying HFS compression to a file isn't a trivial matter *at all*, so I've added a bit more failsafe protections to the version I'm using myself. Given the disk savings it can give I really don't understand why the patch that adds HFS compression to port activation was never accepted. >I am not space savings in Snow Leopard were the result of using file >compression. I’d rather wager Apple get rid of some universal code (ppc/ppc64) >in 10.6. 10.5 was the final version usable with ppc, AFAIR. Yes, but lots of apps and most all libraries/frameworks still had PPC code in them because 10.6 was the last version providing Rosetta. R. _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
