isn't xz extremely slw with -9?
maybe it wasn't a bug, bit intentionally not used,
as that huge extra amount of time doesn't result in
that many bytes saved.
is the compression level configureable somehow?
Regards, Andreas
isn't xz extremely slw with -9?
maybe it wasn't a bug, bit intentionally not used,
as that huge extra amount of time doesn't result in
that many bytes saved.
Compared to the total time of make dist its IMHO
acceptable. But configurability won't hurt of course.
Pavel
Well, does somebody have numbers (memory, time, compression) as to what
is reasonable?
I didn't make any testing, but the report came from the observation
that result was +300kb on 9 mb. The compression was slow, but
decompression is not affected.
pavel
Hello Pavel,
* Pavel Sanda wrote on Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 01:22:06PM CEST:
the newly added dist-xz target produce worse compressed archives
than lzma-dist. The reason is that automake call lzma with
best compression while it won't use -9 level for xz.
Is this intention or bug?
Bug, I guess.
Hello Andreas,
* Andreas Jellinghaus wrote on Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 09:37:13PM CEST:
isn't xz extremely slw with -9?
maybe it wasn't a bug, bit intentionally not used,
as that huge extra amount of time doesn't result in
that many bytes saved.
Well, does somebody have numbers (memory,
